Goa RTI Saleli

PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa came down heavily on the Member Secretary of Goa State Pollution Control Board and Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Bicholim, for not doing their duty responsibly, in the matter of quarries and stone crushers operating at Saleli village.

The Division bench of Chief Justice of Bombay High Court Swatanter Kumar and Justice NA Britto, while hearing a petition on the stone crushers and quarries operating in Saleli village without necessary approvals, observed that the Court expects all the authorities concerned to work in tandem, so that public purpose is not frustrated by inaction of non-cooperation of the officials.

When the matter was taken up in the morning, member secretary of GSPCB and SDM, Bicholim were asked to remain present in the Court and assure the Court that they would do their duty bit responsibly.
A villager Nanda Gaonkar and Goa Foundation had filed a petition in the High Court for quashing the consents and any other approvals granted to the units—M/s Rehamaniya Metal Industries, M/s Shani Metal Industries, M/s Foures Metal Industries, M/s Madhav Rameshwar Industries, M/s Kane Industries, M/s Rudreshwar Metals, M/s Parvati Enterprises, M/s Laxmi Metal Industries, M/s Souparnika Metal Industries, Bausaheb J Rane, Balaji Stone Crusher, Vishwanath Naik, St Sebastian Industries, Anthony Fernandes, Krishnarao Rane, Chandrakant d Tar and Subhash Rane—for operation of the quarries and stone crushers and hotmix plants in the village.
They had also prayed to direct the GSPCB not to grant consents to any stone crusher units, quarries and related activities in non-conforming area as per the statutory land use plan in the state and pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, direct GSPCB not to grant any new consents or renew any consents of the units in areas zoned as agriculture or orchard in the statutory land use plan.

The Court noticed that the SDM of Bicholim had prepared a report on January 9, 2006, wherein he had passed the following directions to the units to stop carrying the occupation of all until full details of precautionary methods adopted by them to suppress dust pollution is submitted.


But despite the fact that more than a year has gone by, no steps have been taken by the said officer despite health and environment hazards that are going to result from the operation of these units, the Court remarked. SDM has been asked to obtain reports from all departments.

Further, the Court observed that GSPCB couldn't have granted any conditional permission to the units as it intends to frustrate the very meaning of the Environment Act. The Member Secretary has been directed by the Court to examine the applications submitted and pass appropriate orders within two weeks from today, even as they made it clear that no orders passed by the authorities will be effective without the Court order. They have also been asked to submit to the Court the parameter maintained by the units when they operate. For this purpose, the Court has allowed the Member Secretary to operate the units for 8 hours at a stretch, in full capacity, on any one working day.

Even the Secretary of Mines and Environment have been asked to file an affidavit making the state stand clear on whether change of land use from forest or agriculture to industrial has been permitted, as well a give status regards to NOC from TCP department.

Everyone has to file their affidavits within two weeks, as the Court has made it clear that none of the authorities will be entitled for further time.