The decision by the Punjab and Haryana High Court to stay the operation of Haryana’s ‘stilt-plus-4 (S+4) floor’ policy for residential plots holding that the state appeared to prioritise revenue over public safety while ignoring basic infrastructure realities has not only provided relief to those opposing the policy, but also sparked a fresh debate over its implications.What is the S4 policy?The S+4 policy allows construction of four floors on stilts on residential plots in existing centres of the Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP) sectors. Under the existing policy, upto three floors can be constructed on any residential plots in the absence of stilts.Why are RWAs opposing the policy?Resident Welfare Associations (RWAs) at sectors in major cities, including Gurugram, Faridabad, Hisar, and Rohtak, are opposing the stilt plus four floors policy, stating that existing infrastructure is not equipped to handle the increased load on water, sewage, and electricity systems. They argue the decision has led to high-rise structures in plotted sectors, causing parking congestion, traffic strain, and safety concerns. Residents also say rampant construction is blocking sunlight, reducing clean air, and altering the character and density of residential areas.What did the state government panel recommend regarding policy?An expert panel formed by the state government in 2023 over the issue, recommended construction of stilt-plus-four floors with riders, including infrastructure augmentation and suggested infrastructure audits and proposed reduction in building height, construction of independent structures and allowing these only for family accommodation. Among other suggestions, the committee recommended the constitution of quick response teams to curb misuse of stilt parking and disallowing enclosing of this space. The report pointed out that wherever such constructions are already in place or building plans have been approved, an audit of the existing infrastructure be carried out and it be augmented to cater to the increased population.What did the High Court observe about the policy while staying its operation?Coming down heavily on the state’s approach, the Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry observed: “It appears that Haryana merely to earn more revenue has put the safety and security of members of the general public at stake.” The Bench added that the state and its functionaries gave a go by to all “important aspects of conducting `infrastructure capacity audit’ before implementing the S+4 floor policy” while turning a Nelson’s eye towards the desperate shortage of infrastructural requirement in Gurugram city.