Karna Shakya Disputes Demolition of Waterfront Resort Amid Phewa Lake Compliance Enforcement
Pokhara. Following the demolition of structures, including the swimming pool, at Waterfront Resort on Saturday morning, proprietor Karna Shakya has responded. In a social media post on Sunday morning, he claimed that his structures were not within the designated compliance zone of Phewa Lake.
Is Karna Shakya's claim accurate? Let's examine his response against the facts and the court order.
1) The 65-meter standard
Shakya claims the hotel building is outside the 65-meter compliance zone and that other private land exists between the hotel and the lake. However, the Supreme Court has noted that many structures fall within the 65-meter prohibited area. The court's order is based on a report from the Survey Department, which indicates that the water purification tank, swimming pool, toilets, trusses, garden, parking, main gate, and guard house are all within the 65-meter limit.
2) Land ownership
Shakya claims he purchased 17 ropanis of land, holds legal title deeds, and has not encroached on any land. The court concluded that the land plots 173, 304, and 305 used by the hotel are public land and that the resort built structures on them. Furthermore, the court deemed the registration of land that was submerged in Phewa Lake between 2021 and 2031 BS under private names as fraudulent. According to the order, such land registration will be automatically revoked.
3) Construction permits
Shakya claims the building maps were approved, he holds licenses from the tourism and industry departments, and all legal processes were followed. The court has declared the recommendation and approval letter submitted by the hotel on 2066 Bhadra 24 as illegal. The court did not consider the recommendation, which was issued in haste without a meeting of the Town Development Committee and based on the signature of an unauthorized person, to be lawful.
4) Environment and pollution
Shakya claims to have installed a state-of-the-art septic tank and is conscious of environmental protection. Based on an investigation report, the court noted that laboratory tests of water discharged from the hotel showed it was not potable, casting doubt on the hotel's claims regarding pollution control.
5) Compensation and displacement
Shakya argues that demolishing structures without proper compensation and prior notice is unjust and detrimental to tourism. The court stated that no compensation is required when removing structures built by encroaching on government or public land. The court concluded that it is the state's duty to protect public property and that public assets cannot be used for personal gain.
Pokhara Mayor Dhanraj Acharya stated that Shakya's claims do not align with the findings of the study report. 'We have issued notices repeatedly after the court order. He is aware of it, but he has been defiant,' he said. 'He is a respected individual, but his claims do not match the court's order.' He has urged other owners of structures within the compliance zone to remove them voluntarily.
This specific news has been automatically translated by AI. As a result, there may be some inaccuracies or language errors.
