Srinagar ,Oct 8: The Environment Policy Group has welcomed the objectives of the Jammu & Kashmir Ease of Doing Business Act, 2026, aimed at simplifying procedures, reducing duplication, shortening delays and improving regulatory predictability. However, it has cautioned that in an ecologically fragile and disaster-prone region like J&K, ease of doing business must not come at the cost of environmental protection, spatial planning and public safety.

The Group has raised particular concerns over Section 22, which provides powers for relaxation or modification of requirements. It said broad executive discretion could potentially alter planning requirements without following the statutory planning process.
According to the Group, Master Plans and Zonal Plans are not routine permissions but long-term spatial frameworks based on land-use assessments, infrastructure needs, environmental considerations and public consultation. Their dilution through executive exemptions, it said, could undermine the planning hierarchy established under the J&K Development Act, 1970.
The Group also stressed that J&K's vulnerability to earthquakes, floods, landslides, unstable slopes and wetland loss makes risk-sensitive planning essential. It said development facilitation should not bypass location-specific safeguards, particularly in flood-absorption areas, wetlands, steep slopes, heritage zones and other environmentally sensitive locations.
On deemed approvals, the Group said time-bound clearances can reduce administrative delays, but should distinguish routine procedural matters from substantive planning, environmental, structural and public-safety decisions. Administrative silence, it added, should not automatically amount to approval for high-risk projects.
The Group supported risk-based regulation but called for objective risk categories, clear thresholds, reliable spatial data and competent institutions. It suggested integrating J&K's GIS-based planning and disaster-risk systems into the EoDB framework so that scrutiny is proportionate to the actual level of risk.
It further called for eliminating duplication rather than substantive safeguards, stressing that environmental, building, fire, structural and land-use standards must remain enforceable. The objective, it said, should be single-window regulation, not single-window deregulation.
The Group also sought clear criteria, written reasons, public disclosure and review mechanisms wherever relaxation, exemption or deemed approval powers are exercised. Significant changes affecting land use and development controls, it said, should remain transparent and subject to public consultation.
Referring to national EoDB reforms, the Group said States can simplify approvals through digitisation, single-window systems, online permissions, time-bound clearances and risk-based inspections without dismantling planning and building-control frameworks.
The Group said it does not oppose removal of unnecessary regulatory burdens, but maintained that economic development, environmental protection and disaster resilience must advance together.
It said Section 22 warrants legal and planning scrutiny to ensure that executive facilitation does not inadvertently override statutory planning frameworks.
The Group is continuing its detailed examination of the Act and said it will place its recommendations before the Government and the public after completing the review.