TODAY’S PAPER | December 13, 2025 | EPAPER

LHC questions govt over shrinking green spaces

.


Our Correspondent December 13, 2025 1 min read

LAHORE:

The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Wednesday expressed serious concern over the city's fast-disappearing green cover as it continued hearings on petitions related to smog control and environmental pollution.

The bench issued strict directives to government departments, emphasising the preservation of Lahore's historic parks and tree cover.

During the proceedings, a member of the judicial commission informed the court that the Environment Department had amended its rules, allowing certain projects, including those at Nasir Bagh, to proceed without requiring an NOC.

The commission also submitted reports on treatment plants at two additional sugar mills.

Justice Shahid Karim ordered that all sugar mills must install functional wastewater treatment plants, stressing that no exemption would be allowed.

Referring to Nasir Bagh, Justice Karim remarked that historic spaces such as this represent the city's cultural identity and must be safeguarded. He directed the Lahore Development Authority (LDA) to factor in the historical significance of such sites before approving any development.

The judge also instructed the DG LDA to hold a meeting with architect Raza Ali Dada, who had objected that the proposed parking plan was unsuitable for Nasir Bagh.

The court ordered a detailed report on the meeting to be submitted at the next hearing, warning that if objections were not addressed, it would be "compelled to stop the Nasir Bagh project."

Justice Karim noted that large-scale projects such as the Metro Bus, Orange Line Train, and the forthcoming RUDA development had already altered the city's landscape, and earlier court judgments remained on record. However, he asserted that the cutting of trees and destruction of greenery "is not acceptable under any circumstances."

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ