International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2013) 2, 224–231

Gulf Organisation for Research and Development

International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment

ScienceDirectwww.sciencedirect.com

Technical Note

Building regulations for environmental protection in Indian hill towns

Ashwani Kumar a,⇑, Pushplata b

a Department of Architecture & Planning, Malaviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur, Indiab Department of Architecture & Planning, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India

Received 19 November 2013; accepted 19 April 2014

Abstract

Environmental quality of a settlement is outcome of natural and built environment, which is crucial for sustainable development andmaintaining ecological balance, and one of the most critical concerns faced by settlements in India. The degrading environmental qualityof settlements is collective result of rapid development, increasing population, depleting vegetation and water resources, excess pollutionand waste generation and results in ecological imbalance and climate change at large. The problem of degrading environmental quality ismost crucial in hill towns of India which are ecologically most fragile and undergoing rapid urbanization.

Hill towns are witness to environmental degradation in the form of changes in the micro climate, loss of vegetation cover, increase insurface run off, reduction in recharging of aquifers and water table, increase in soil erosion, flooding, pollution and increase inoccurrences of instability which not only affect the environment of the town but also the surrounding region. To mitigate the impactof development on natural environment and maintaining environmental quality in hill towns, various building regulations related toenvironmental protection are enforced, but the problem of environmental degradation still persists in hill towns.

This paper discusses various building regulations enforced in different hill towns for environmental protection to identify variousproblems and lacunas, which are responsible for degraded environmental quality in hill towns. Considerations for new building regula-tions for environmental protection in hill towns have been suggested so that environmentally sound and sustainable developments inecologically fragile hill towns can be achieved� 2014 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.

Keywords: Building regulations; Hill towns; Environmental protection

Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

1. Introduction

Sustainability of a settlement can be achieved throughcombination of environmental, economic and social

2212-6090 � 2014 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Prod

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.0

⇑ Corresponding author. Mobile: +91 9549658116.E-mail address: ashwani.patiyal@gmail.com (A. Kumar).

Peer review under responsibility of The Gulf Organisation for Researchand Development.

Production and hosting by Elsevier

Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

sustainability. Out of these, environmental sustainability isthe most crucial to reduce pollution and ecologicaldegradation, reduces ecological imbalance and minimizesthe impact of climate change at large. The built environmentof a settlement has a major role in achieving environmentalsustainability (which can be expressed in terms of environ-mental quality), it is affected by type, pattern, extent andquality of buildings/built environment. The degrading envi-ronmental quality of settlements is collective consequence ofincreasing population, depleting vegetation, rapid develop-ment, excess pollution and waste generation. However,many of these causes/reasons of degradation of environ-mental quality are outcome of present inappropriate

uction and hosting by Elsevier B.V.

4.003

A. Kumar, Pushplata / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 224–231 225

pattern, type, extent of and quality of existing developmentwithout considering geo-environmental context in Indiantowns/cities. The problem of degrading environmental qual-ity is most critical in hill towns of India which are ecologi-cally fragile and environmentally sensitive zones.

Any area having altitude more than 600 m from meansea level or an average slope of 30� may be classified as hilly(Bureau of Indian Standards, 2005), which includes 21% oftotal land area of India. Hill regions have varied geo-environmental conditions and resources available fordevelopment and are declared as ecologically sensitiveareas by Ministry of Environment and Forest (MOEF),India (Kapoor et al., 2009). But, unlike most of the ecolog-ical sensitive zones/areas of world, Indian hill towns are thepeculiar examples of massive urban development in envi-ronmentally or ecological sensitive, which are growingexponentially over and above of their natural carryingcapacities (Fig. 1) and hampering/affecting environmentin and around hill towns.

Hill towns in the Indian Himalayan region are experi-encing high urbanization due to high population growthand increase in tourist activity, as a result hill towns havedeveloped much more than their carrying capacities. Due

Figure 1. Excessive development in hill towns,

to high urbanization hill towns are facing problems like,overcrowding, congestion, chaos, traffic problems, acuteshortage of housing and infrastructure, encroachments,environmental degradation in the form of air, water andnoise pollution, disturbance to surface and ground watersources, loss of vegetation, frequent and proneness toheavy damages during natural hazards, absence or poorquality of public spaces and loss of heritage, which resultsin poor living conditions and deterioration of the environ-ment quality (Pushplata and Kumar, 2012). Moreover, newdevelopment in hill towns is based on a piecemealapproach and lack in proper planning and design(JNNURM, 2006). To mitigate these ill impacts of devel-opment various building regulations along with develop-ment plans and proposals are enforced in hill towns, butthe problem still persists. To protect the environment in hilltown various environmental regulations related to cuttingof slopes, tree preservation, drainage pattern, protectionagainst landslides and earthquakes, rain water harvesting,preservation of natural features and elements and top soilprotection and erosion control are enforced in different hilltowns. To identify various problems and issues of existingbuilding regulations which are responsible for degraded

much more than their carrying capacities.

226 A. Kumar, Pushplata / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 224–231

environmental quality, it is essential to compare/discussvarious building regulations enforced for environmentalprotection in different hill towns.

2. Existing building regulations related to environmental

protection in hill towns

To understand various problems/issues related to exist-ing building regulations in force in hill towns, a study isdone related to different building regulations enforced forenvironmental protection in major hill towns like Shimla,Manali, Dalhousie, Mussoorie, Nainital, Shillong andSrinagar located in Indian Himalayan region. Existingbuilding regulations are compared to identify varioussimilarities and variations, and attempts are being madeto understand issues of their enforcement. The comparisonis done on the quantitative basis considering the provisionspresented in relation to different regulations. Buildingregulations considered for study are taken from master/development plans and building bye-laws, are as follows:

� Draft Development Plan for Shimla Planning Area,2021.� Draft Development Plan for Manali Planning Area,

2021.� Draft Development Plan for Dalhousie Planning Area,

2021.� Nainital Lake Region Special Area Development

Authority Building Regulations.� Meghalaya Building-Bye Laws, 2011.� Building Regulations and Bye-Laws (Kashmir

Division), 2010.� Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority Building

Construction and Development bye-laws(Amendment), 2003.

The general information related to demography, townarea, altitude and year of enforcement of current buildingregulations are shown in Table 1.

It shows that, all these building regulations are revised/amended in recent years, to cater the changing needs whichare consequent of the high rate of urbanization in these hilltowns. In order to analyze or find out the issues related tobuilding regulations for environmental protection, a study

Table 1Hill towns in Indian Himalayan region considered for the study.

S No. Town Population(mc area) 2011

Altitude(m)

Year of enforcementof present regulations

1 Shimla 169,758 2205 20112 Dalhousie 7051 1954 20043 Manali 8096 1826 20054 Nainital 41,377 2084 20035 Mussoorie 30,118 1876 20036 Srinagar 1,180,570 1585 20107 Shillong 143,007 1525 2011

is conducted related to existing building regulations forenvironmental protection in hill towns of India.

2.1. Existing regulations for environmental protection in hill

towns

Maintaining environmental quality, protecting naturalfeatures and minimizing the impact of development on nat-ural environment in and around hill towns are the majorchallenges for present development in hill towns. Regula-tions related to Solar passive design/energy efficiency, rainwater harvesting, cutting of slopes, tree preservation,drainage of site, maintenance of drainage pattern, slopestability, material regulations and top soil protection anderosion control are in force in different hill towns for envi-ronmental protection. The existing regulations related toenvironment protection in force in Indian hill towns aretabulated and shown in Table 2. Various issues highlightedfrom the comparison of building regulations for environ-mental protection are discussed below:

Every hill town has regulations in force related to cut-ting of slopes, drainage of site and maintenance of existingdrainage pattern, most towns have regulations related torain water harvesting, earthquake safety and tree preserva-tion; making these regulations most essential for environ-mental protection in hill towns. Whereas, very few hilltowns have regulations related to solar passive design/energy efficiency, landslide safety, slope stability, preserva-tion of natural features and material regulations.

Presently, energy being the most critical issue for devel-opment, there are lot of concerns at international, nationaland regional level related to its conservation and optimaluse. Building regulations of Shimla have incorporated reg-ulations related to solar passive design and energy conser-vation, to minimize energy consumption for maintainingcomfort conditions in public, government and semi govern-ment buildings. No other hill town has such regulationsrelated to solar passive design in buildings. But, in Shimlain spite of enforced regulations, these regulations related touse of solar passive features are not followed in the plan-ning, design and construction of govt. semi-govt. and officebuildings.

Regulations related to rain water harvesting exist inmost of hill towns, but rain water harvesting systems(RWHS) are not implemented in majority of buildings con-structed. As per a survey conducted by Himachal PradeshTown and Country Planning Department, related to rainwater harvesting systems implemented from 1999 toSeptember 2011, there are 10,655 buildings approved withrain water harvesting systems, but only 1019 buildings(9.56%) have rain water harvesting systems in workingcondition. There are a total of 262 government buildingapprovals in this period and only 47 buildings (17.94%)have rain water harvesting systems in working condition,whereas there are 10,393 private building developmentapprovals, out of which 972 (9.35%) have rain waterharvesting systems (T&CP Shimla, 2011). The presence of

Table 2Building regulations for environmental protection in hill towns.

Regulations related to: Shimla Dalhousie Manali Mussoorie Nainital Srinagar Shillong Towns havingregulations

Solar passive design/energy efficiency * O O O O O O 01Rain water harvesting * * * * O * * 06Cutting of slopes * * * * * * * 07Tree preservation * * * * * O O 05Drainage of site * * * * * * * 07Maintenance of drainage pattern * * * * * * * 07Slope stability O O O O * * * 03Preservation of natural features

like water bodiesO O * * * O O 03

Material regulations O O O O * * * 03Top soil protection and erosion control* Regulations specified O Regulations not specified

A. Kumar, Pushplata / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 224–231 227

low number of rain water harvesting systems even ingovernment buildings shows neglectful attitude of authorityofficials toward crucial environmental concerns. Moreover,there are no incentives given to private owners/developersfor implementing rain water harvesting systems in theirbuildings/complexes.

The maximum height of cutting of hill slopes variesfrom 3.5 m to 6.6 m in hill towns. But, in practice, slopesare cut much more than the permissible value (Fig. 2),which leads to change in the natural drainage patternand increase in instances of instability or landslides, whichcause multiple impacts on human life, resources and envi-ronment (Fig. 3).

Some towns have regulations related to preservation ofnatural water sources, but natural water sources present inor around hill towns like, streams, waterfalls, rivers, lakesetc are facing serious problems related to pollution and sil-tation. Every town has regulations related to maintenanceof upstream drainage pattern, and site drainage showsimportance of maintaining drainage pattern. But, in spiteof these regulations natural drainage pattern has changedin hill towns due to human interventions.

Regulations related to preservation of existing trees andplantations of new trees are presented in building regula-tions of hill towns. In spite of this, all slopes of hill townsappear barren without any plantations, covered only withconcrete buildings, highlighting the need to change imple-mentation process.

Building regulations related to environmental protectionare formulated in hill towns but, in present developmentapproval process/system; there is no mechanism/procedureto check the implementation of these essential regulations.Moreover, there are no incentives given to building ownersfor implementing environmental protection regulations. Asa consequence of these inappropriate/no regulationsrelated to environment protection the environmental qual-ity and living conditions are deteriorating adversely affect-ing the health and well being of residents of hill towns andsurrounding areas.

Though, the maximum value of cutting of slope is spec-ified in existing in force building regulations in hill towns.

Size of building (building footprint) has direct implicationon the cutting of slope, which intern results in disturbanceof natural drainage pattern, loss of top soil and vegetationand increase in instances of instability/slope failure. More-over, earth produced from cutting of slopes is mostlydumped illegally into valley areas or near water sourcesthus, blocking river/stream flow and causing serious impacton water quality and aquatic life. Cutting of the slopes hasan impact on the provisions of setbacks to buildings.

2.1.1. Cutting of slopes and front and rear setbacks

Cutting of slopes is crucial for obtaining flat grounds tocommence any building or developmental work in hillregions. Excessive cutting of slopes for roads and buildingspracticed at present leads to occurrence of landslides, whichresult in heavy loss to human life and resources and alsotriggers environmental/ecological imbalance (Fig. 4).

One of the major issues identified, which affects the envi-ronment and living conditions, is absence of front and rearsetbacks between buildings and road; building and cutslope. However, the feasibility of setback(s) in buildingson sloping sites is to be analyzed with respect to cuttingof slopes. These setbacks can be used to provide adequatenatural daylight to buildings (which intern reduces energyconsumption) and/or for growing vegetations, which helpsin environmental protection in hills. Buildings on a slopingsite may be constructed either on uphill side or downhillside of a road either by cutting or filling the slopes, respec-tively. A building constructed on the uphill side of a 6.0 mwide road is assumed and depth of building is taken as15 m for the analysis purposes. This building is analyzedfor three different setback conditions.

In the first case building is abutting both the road andcut slope on back; in the second case a setback of threemeters is provided from the road but rear portion is in con-tact with cut slope and in the third case a 3 m wide setbackis provided to the building from the road as well as the cutslope These three conditions are analyzed for differentslope angles such as 10�, 15�, 20�, 25�, 30�, 35�, 40� and45� and height of cutting required is determined and tabu-lated in Table 3 and shown in Fig. 5.

228 A. Kumar, Pushplata / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 224–231

The maximum permissible height of slope cutting is gen-erally specified in existing building regulations, which varybetween 3 and 4 m, in most hill towns and is uniform for allareas/zones irrespective of topography (slope angle) andsoil types. It is mandatory through existing building regu-lations to provide setbacks around buildings in hill towns,but as found in the study of hill towns these setbacks arenot followed properly.

As per provisions in Indian Standard (IS) codes themaximum height of cut slope will be 8 m (Bureau ofIndian Standards, 1995) therefore, for slopes having slopeangle less than 20� front and rear set back can be providedto the buildings. It is not feasible to construct any buildingor provide front and rear setbacks on slopes more than 20�.However front and rear setback can be provided to build-ings on slope between 20� and 30� by designing them asstep back buildings (splitting their ground floor in two ormore levels). It is difficult to construct as the height ofcut slope is much higher on slopes more than 30�.

Moreover, if the size of building (building footprint) ismore than what is assumed in the study and also setbacksare more than 3 m, in all those cases construction withprescribed height of cutting of slopes (as per IS code orbuilding regulations) is not feasible even on lower slopes.But in actual practice, slopes even up to 45� are used forconstruction of multistoried buildings in hill towns

Figure 2. Heavy lose of vegetation for multi-s

(especially in Shimla) (TCPO, 2011) thus highlighting theneed for formulating new regulations for environmentalprotection in hill towns. Moreover, the permissible heightof cutting of slopes specified in existing building regula-tions in hill towns varies between 3 and 4.5, which is usu-ally less than that specified by IS Codes and results inmore violations of regulations.

It is observed from the study that lower slopes (up to20�) get sufficient width of flat terrace after cutting, whichcan be used for various development activities, as com-pared to width of flat terrace obtained after cutting of stee-per slopes. More/higher cutting of slopes is required todevelop/construct building of same footprint on higherslope gradients as compared to lower slope gradients.Therefore, buildings which are constructed on higher slopeshould have smaller footprint than the buildings con-structed on lower slopes, to minimize the cutting of slopesand also to minimize environmental degradation. Theretaining walls used to protect and support the cut hill por-tion consume a very high portion of construction/develop-ment cost. Also, these retained surfaces used for slopeprotection appear to be very dull unless treated properly.

On the downhill side of road there are more criticalconcerns of development than on the uphill side of road.The depth and type of foundation required for buildingson downhill side vary according to slope gradient and slope

toried development in hill towns of India.

Figure 3. Huge development which results in environmental degradation in hill towns of India.

A. Kumar, Pushplata / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 224–231 229

materials as foundations on downhill side are generallyprone to differential settlement. Generally, developmenton the downhill side of road is carried out by filling theslopes to achieve leveled ground at road level and the filledportion is supported with the help of retaining walls orbreast walls. The height of retaining wall required for theconstruction is dependent upon slope gradient and buildingsize, which makes construction on higher slopes with largerbuilding footprint very uneconomical. For example evenfor 20� slope and 15 m building depth the required heightof retaining wall will be 7.32 m to have 3 m front and rearsetbacks. Also, on the downhill side of road the construc-tion is generally carried out on columns (stilts) having nobuilt space on levels below approach road; or constructionis carried out from the lowermost suitable/feasible leveland entrance/approach to building is provided at roadlevel. This type of development consists of one or morefloors below ground level depending upon the slope gradi-ent and size of building. The construction of retaining wallsfor holding the cut slopes and separating of building wall

from retaining wall are other crucial issues often neglectedin the existing construction.

It is evident from above discussions that the existingbuilding regulations are not appropriate for environmentalprotections in Indian hill towns, which need to be amendedfor archiving systematic and contextual development whichhave minimal environment degradation or disturbance inhill towns. The various considerations which are crucialfor formulation of building regulations for environmentalprotection are discussed below.

3. Environmental regulations for hill towns

Existing environmental regulations are mostly ‘needbased’ generally enforced to mitigate the harsh impacts ofdevelopment and urbanizations on various componentsof environment, so that ecological balance should not betriggered off (e.g. in order to control the depleting groundwater table, regulations related to rain water harvestingand ground water recharge are enforced). Along with these

Figure 4. Cutting of slopes more than permissible limits for development.

Table 3Height of cut slope required for different slope gradients.

Slopein site

Height of cutting of slope

Buildingwithoutsetback

Building with 3 mfront setback

Building with 3 m frontand rear setback

10� 3.78 4.31 4.8415� 5.71 6.51 7.3220� 8.15 8.74 9.8325� 9.79 11.19 12.5930� 12.12 13.86 15.5935� 14.70 16.68 18.9140� 17.62 20.14 22.9145� 21 24 27

230 A. Kumar, Pushplata / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 224–231

need based building regulations which should be compul-sory to all developments, there is a need to formulate‘impact based regulations’ i.e. regulations based on theimpact, which a building is making on the environmentand the surrounding areas. An investigation of possibleimpacts of building on environment need to be conductedand regulations to balance out/mitigate the impacts on

Figure 5. Height of cutting of slop

environment and surrounding need to be enforced ondevelopment.

To formulate environmental regulations for hill towns,environmental quality standards for urban areas in hillregions need to be established, which should also considerthe resurgence of deteriorated environment quality in hillregions. On the basis of these environmental quality stan-dards different environmental regulations are formulatedfor hill towns, however to ensure compliance of in forceenvironment regulations in an efficient and effective man-ner the following steps need to be considered for the formu-lation and implementation of building regulations forenvironmental protection:

3.1. Formulation of mandatory environmental regulations

For the formulation of mandatory building regulationsfor environmental protection (like energy efficient design,rain water harvesting, cutting of slopes, tree preservationand site drainage etc) various factors such as, plot area,use and building bulk need to be considered. Differentprovisions under every regulation for environmental

e with respect to slope of site.

A. Kumar, Pushplata / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 224–231 231

protection need to be specified depending upon these fac-tors (plot size, use and building bulk), so that the manda-tory provisions for environmental protection should beimplemented comprehensively in hill towns.

3.2. Formulation of impact based regulations

Impact based regulations which are essential forimproving the environmental quality in hill towns and tomitigate the ill impacts of development on hill regionsshould be made. These regulations include plantation oftrees, preservation of fertile top soil and its reuse, terracegardens in place of lost green vegetation cover. These reg-ulations are formulated and implemented based on theimpact of new development on environment so that theseimpacts should be minimized.

Along with formulation of building regulations for envi-ronmental protection in hill towns, there is a need to devicea new and effective mechanism for the implementation ofboth need and impact based regulations for environmentalprotection. So, that these regulations are implemented andfollowed effectively for environmental protection in hilltowns. There is a need to dissemination of information/knowledge related to building regulations for environmen-tal protection, so that residents should know the variousenvironmental regulation and requisitions need to be ful-filled for compliance with building regulations. Incentivessuch as rebate in municipal taxes, development and reduc-tion in service charges need to be made for buildings whichfollow building regulations for environmental protection.Moreover, there is a need of regular monitoring of variousprovisions implemented for environmental protections toassess their current working condition so that these provi-sions should work efficiently. Moreover, reviews of existingprovisions should be made at regular basis so that improve-ments in various regulations and provisions for environ-mental protection in hill towns should be made.

4. Conclusion

The built environment of a settlement has a major rolein achieving environmental sustainability, it is affected bytype, pattern, extent and quality of buildings/built environ-ment. A unique environment is present for development inecologically sensitive hill towns which guides all types andpatterns of development and these conditions are not sopronounced in other towns of same size in other parts.Presently, due to high urbanization hill towns are facingproblems like, overcrowding, congestion, chaos, trafficproblems, acute shortage of housing and infrastructure,encroachments, environmental degradation in form ofair, water and noise pollution, disturbance to surface andground water sources, loss of vegetation, frequent andproneness to heavy damages during natural hazards,absence or poor quality of public spaces and loss of heri-tage, which result in poor living conditions and deteriora-tion of environment quality.

To protect the environment in hill towns various envi-ronmental regulations related to cutting of slopes, treepreservation, drainage pattern, protection against land-slides and earthquakes, rain water harvesting, preservationof natural features and elements and top soil protectionand erosion control are enforced in different hill towns,but the problems related to these crucial concerns still per-sist. The noncompliance of building regulations for envi-ronmental protection also imparts adverse impact onurban environment of hill towns and rendered them envi-ronmentally unsustainable and ecologically inappropriate.

There is need to, formulate and implement regulationsfor environmental protection in hill towns effectively sothat environmental friendly and sustainable developmentshould be achieved in hill towns. Existing environmentalregulations are mostly ‘need based’ generally enforced tomitigate the harsh impacts of development and urbaniza-tions on various components of environment, so that eco-logical balance should not be triggered off. Along withthese need based building regulations which should becompulsory to all developments, there is a need to formu-late ‘impact based regulations’ i.e. regulations based on theimpact, which a building is making on the environment andthe surrounding areas.

References

Bureau of Indian Standards, 1995. I.S. 14243 Part 2, Guidelines forselection and development of hill sites. Bureau of Indian Standards,New Delhi.

Bureau of Indian Standards, 2005. National Building Code. Bureau ofIndian Standards, New Delhi.

Chief Architect (J&K), 2010, Building Regulations and Bye-Laws(Kashmir Division) 2010. [http://smcsite.org/Building-Regulations_Bylaws_byelaws-Kashmir_Division.pdf on 15.07.11].

Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM), 2006,Shimla City Development Plan, Shimla.

Kapoor, M., Kohli, K., Menon, M., 2009. India’s Notified EcologicallySensitive Areas (ESAs): The Story so far..., Kalpavriksh, Delhi &WWF-India, New Delhi.

Meghalaya Urban Development Authority (MUDA), 2011, MeghalayaBuilding-Bye Laws 2011 [http://meghalaya.nic.in/MBBL2011.pdf on15.07.11].

Mussoorie Dehradun development authority building construction anddevelopment byelaws (Amendment), 2003 [http://www.mddaon-line.com/others/bylawschanges.pdf on 15.07.11].

Pushplata, Kumar, Ashwani, 2012. Building regulations: as a means ofensuring sustainable development in hill towns. Journal of Environ-mental Research and Development 7A (1A), 553–560.

Town & Country Planning office Shimla, 2011, Cumulative detail ofapproved government & private buildings with respect to implemen-tation of rain water harvesting system for the period 1999 to 09/2011 inall planning/special areas [http://himachal.gov.in/tcp/WaterSys2011_A1b.pdf on 20.02.12].

Town & Country Planning office Shimla, 2011, Draft Development Planfor Shimla Planning Area 2021, Shimla [http://himachal.gov.in/tcp/pdf/DPSHIMLA2012_A1b.pdf on 02.02.12].

Town & Country Planning office Shimla, 2005, Draft Development planfor Manali Planning area 2021 [http://himachal.gov.in/tcp/DPManali.pdf on 15.01.12].

Town & Country Planning office, 2004, Draft Development plan forDalhousie Planning area 2021[downloaded from http://himachal.gov.in/tcp/DPDalhouise.pdf on 15.01.12].