PANJIM: First, it was IT park at Socorro that was in the news for the wrong reasons and now IT habitat at Dona Paula inaugurated by Congress president Sonia Gandhi faces a similar fate.
Nitoll Jinn Trust, an NGO, has approached the High Court challenging the absence of procedure in the allotment of plots at Dona Paula, even as they made it clear that they are not against the setting up of an IT habitat.
The petitioners have stated that if there are more applications than the plots available, then the criteria for selection and allotment of the plots to the applicant have to be declared beforehand. However, in the case of It habitat at Dona Paula, Info Tech Corporation of Goa Limited has no cr iteria of evaluation of various applicants and the allotments are arbitrary, alleged the petitioner.
They have further in their petition stated that there is no provision in the scheme to ensure that the developers of the property sell or lease their properties only to IT or IT related companies -- – ITES (Information Technology Enabled Services, though it is called a IT habitat. The petitioners stated that considering that the lands have been allotted, considerably below the market price, there should have been some conditions to ensure that the final benefit of this subsidy goes to IT or ITES. But there is no such provision and therefore the petitioners have prayed to cancel all the allotments and direct InfoTech Corporation of Goa Limited to follow proper procedures in allotment of plots.
The petitioners have said that IT is a human resource based activity and not a land based activity and development of IT doesn't require allotment of such huge plots. Info Tech Corporation of Goa Limited should take into consideration the experience of other states and allot only that much land required for a given IT activity, the petitioners added.
The Court has given two weeks time to serve notice on Info Tech Corporation of Goa Limited.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
election of the Chairman and Vice-chairman of the Goa State Co-operative Bank
PANJIM: The election of the Chairman and Vice-chairman of the Goa State Co-operative Bank was held on schedule yesterday. However, the result of the election will be subject to the result of the petition pending in the High Court.
While admitting a petition filed by a shareholder and elected member Director of the bank, Narayan Mandrekar, the single bench of Justice RS Mohite observed that it is yet to be determined whether persons nominated as Director can continue even after an Administrator was appointed by an High Court order and whether these nominated members have a right to vote on the election of the office bearers.
The respondents - returning officer HP Gemini, Central Registrar of Co-operative Society, Goa State Co-operative Bank and the other Board members - will have to file their reply within two weeks. The matter will come up again on October 18.
The petitioners had challenged the validity of the notice on September 1, 2007, regarding the election of Chairman and Vice-chairman issued by Returning officer appointed by the Central Registrar for conducting elections including that of office bearers of the bank. They had submitted that no election programme for the election on September 6 was prepared or published, in terms of para 7 (3) of the Schedule to the Multi State Co-operative Societies Rules 2002.
To the arguments of the petitioner's counsel, BR Naik, that no notice about the election was given to the four nominated Directors on Board, entitled to vote or contest, the counsel for the co-operative bank, SR Rivonkar submitted that the four persons nominated as Director by the government ceased to be in the Board, once the Board is dissolved and an administrator appointed.
He added that at present there is no nominated Director in the Board and the election for the post of chairman and vice-chairman can take place without the nominated Directors.
The petitioners further contended that they had learnt from the Returning Officer that one individual Director, who was elected yesterday, would not be entitled to contest for the post of Chairman and Vice-chairman and there will be no notice issued to the individual Director. They further stated the Returning Officer mandatorily required to announce schedule of election of Chairman and vice-chairman and/ or the office bearers of the bank and also required to intimate the schedule of election to all the newly elected or nominated members of the Board.
While admitting a petition filed by a shareholder and elected member Director of the bank, Narayan Mandrekar, the single bench of Justice RS Mohite observed that it is yet to be determined whether persons nominated as Director can continue even after an Administrator was appointed by an High Court order and whether these nominated members have a right to vote on the election of the office bearers.
The respondents - returning officer HP Gemini, Central Registrar of Co-operative Society, Goa State Co-operative Bank and the other Board members - will have to file their reply within two weeks. The matter will come up again on October 18.
The petitioners had challenged the validity of the notice on September 1, 2007, regarding the election of Chairman and Vice-chairman issued by Returning officer appointed by the Central Registrar for conducting elections including that of office bearers of the bank. They had submitted that no election programme for the election on September 6 was prepared or published, in terms of para 7 (3) of the Schedule to the Multi State Co-operative Societies Rules 2002.
To the arguments of the petitioner's counsel, BR Naik, that no notice about the election was given to the four nominated Directors on Board, entitled to vote or contest, the counsel for the co-operative bank, SR Rivonkar submitted that the four persons nominated as Director by the government ceased to be in the Board, once the Board is dissolved and an administrator appointed.
He added that at present there is no nominated Director in the Board and the election for the post of chairman and vice-chairman can take place without the nominated Directors.
The petitioners further contended that they had learnt from the Returning Officer that one individual Director, who was elected yesterday, would not be entitled to contest for the post of Chairman and Vice-chairman and there will be no notice issued to the individual Director. They further stated the Returning Officer mandatorily required to announce schedule of election of Chairman and vice-chairman and/ or the office bearers of the bank and also required to intimate the schedule of election to all the newly elected or nominated members of the Board.
Mandar Case: Goa
PANJIM: The suspense about who would be made approver in the sensational Mandar case continues. While the Prosecution argued that Alsaleha Beig be turned approver, the lawyer for Shankar Tiwari insisted that his client be made the state approver in the Children's Court.
However, the Children's Court judge Nutan Sardessai has reserved the order for September 20.
Counsel for the state, public prosecutor Pratima Verekar informed the Court that on the basis of statement under section 164 CrPC made by the accused Beig during investigations and after considering other facts on record, the prosecution gave no objection to making Beig an approver, even as they objected to the application of the accused Shankar.
The PP informed the Court that they had objected to Shankar as he had played a major role in the offence, right from hatching up criminal conspiracy of getting the victim from Vasco to the place where he was killed, preparation for confinement, calling up father of victim and asking for ransom money, making preparation to collect his money, in killing victim, disposing off his dead body and also on other grounds.
However, counsel for Ryan Pinto, Prabhu and counsel for Rohan Dhunghat, Shashank Samanth, submitted that Shankar had played only a minor role. They alleged that Beig had played a major role in the kidnapping and murder of Mandar and law states that only an accused who has played a minor role has to be made an approver. They also alleged that the Chief Minister Pratapsigh Rane had visited Beig in the prison and the Prosecution is trying to protect Beig by turning him into an approver.
The PP brought to the notice of the Court that where prosecution considers that the evidence of accused accomplice is necessary, it should be exercised on behalf of prosecution agency and co-accused can't question the act of granting pardon by the Court to one of the accused, as it is an important matter of the Administration.
Further, relying on a Supreme Court judgment, the PP stated that it is ordinarily for the Prosecution to ask that a particular accused, out of several maybe tendered pardon and even when the accuse directly applies to the Judge, the request must be referred to the prosecuting agency.
PP added that when accuse applies for pardon, then other co-accused have no right to intervene or ask for hearing.
However, the Children's Court judge Nutan Sardessai has reserved the order for September 20.
Counsel for the state, public prosecutor Pratima Verekar informed the Court that on the basis of statement under section 164 CrPC made by the accused Beig during investigations and after considering other facts on record, the prosecution gave no objection to making Beig an approver, even as they objected to the application of the accused Shankar.
The PP informed the Court that they had objected to Shankar as he had played a major role in the offence, right from hatching up criminal conspiracy of getting the victim from Vasco to the place where he was killed, preparation for confinement, calling up father of victim and asking for ransom money, making preparation to collect his money, in killing victim, disposing off his dead body and also on other grounds.
However, counsel for Ryan Pinto, Prabhu and counsel for Rohan Dhunghat, Shashank Samanth, submitted that Shankar had played only a minor role. They alleged that Beig had played a major role in the kidnapping and murder of Mandar and law states that only an accused who has played a minor role has to be made an approver. They also alleged that the Chief Minister Pratapsigh Rane had visited Beig in the prison and the Prosecution is trying to protect Beig by turning him into an approver.
The PP brought to the notice of the Court that where prosecution considers that the evidence of accused accomplice is necessary, it should be exercised on behalf of prosecution agency and co-accused can't question the act of granting pardon by the Court to one of the accused, as it is an important matter of the Administration.
Further, relying on a Supreme Court judgment, the PP stated that it is ordinarily for the Prosecution to ask that a particular accused, out of several maybe tendered pardon and even when the accuse directly applies to the Judge, the request must be referred to the prosecuting agency.
PP added that when accuse applies for pardon, then other co-accused have no right to intervene or ask for hearing.
Water level depleting from 9 to 27 percent in Goa
PANJIM: With the water level depleting from 9 to 27 percent in Goa, it would be difficult times ahead for the water tanker suppliers who draw water from "unknown" sources, adding to the depletion of water level in the state.
The High Court has asked the government to provide a complete list of water tankers operating in state, consumers they are catering to and how is the monitoring of their activities done.
Amicus Curiae Norma Alvares brought to the notice of the Court that the Goa Ground Water Regulation, 2002 has been promulgated and what is required is declaration regarding scheduled, water scarcity and over exploited areas. Norma also pointed out that around 257 water tankers are operating in the state as per the affidavit filed by Water Resources Department and we don't know from where they are drawing water.
She stated that from scheduled areas you can annually take 30,000 lts water and from over exploited areas, prior permission needs to be taken to draw water. To this, the Court observed that why is water tanker required, except for construction purpose, if Goa has good water facility as claimed by the state government?
Further, the division bench of Justice RMS Khandeparkar and Justice RS Mohite questioned the state government about the quality of metres purchased, which becomes defective in 6 years. The Court wanted to know whether the metres are purchased after being tested through scientific methods within two weeks.
The Public Works Department had submitted that the process of replacement of defective water meters is a continuing process and normally the installation of new metres takes about 6 months for the entire procedure. About 7,500 metres had to be replaced/repaired and steps to procure durable water meters wherein the supplier will have responsibility to maintain the same for 6 years.
Further, the High Court as joined as a respondent Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in connection with the date for approval and implementation of the guidelines for sitting of industries, prepared by Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB). The guidelines for siting of Industries in North and South Goa prepared by GDPCB states that 32 industries have an impact potential to air and surface water pollution higher than the pollution receiving potential of the zones available for siting of industries in South and North Goa, which should be restricted from siting.
The report further states that it is not suitable to site industries with high and water pollution impact potential in these two districts since no dispersion of emissions and no dilution will be available for effluents if discharged in the rivers/ water bodies in the districts. The report adds that the rivers and water bodies are sources of water supply and irrigation in the districts and must be protected.
On approval of the same by CPCB, the Zonal Atlas for siting of Industries and Industrial siting guidelines will be forwarded to the state government for approval/ implementation.
The High Court has asked the government to provide a complete list of water tankers operating in state, consumers they are catering to and how is the monitoring of their activities done.
Amicus Curiae Norma Alvares brought to the notice of the Court that the Goa Ground Water Regulation, 2002 has been promulgated and what is required is declaration regarding scheduled, water scarcity and over exploited areas. Norma also pointed out that around 257 water tankers are operating in the state as per the affidavit filed by Water Resources Department and we don't know from where they are drawing water.
She stated that from scheduled areas you can annually take 30,000 lts water and from over exploited areas, prior permission needs to be taken to draw water. To this, the Court observed that why is water tanker required, except for construction purpose, if Goa has good water facility as claimed by the state government?
Further, the division bench of Justice RMS Khandeparkar and Justice RS Mohite questioned the state government about the quality of metres purchased, which becomes defective in 6 years. The Court wanted to know whether the metres are purchased after being tested through scientific methods within two weeks.
The Public Works Department had submitted that the process of replacement of defective water meters is a continuing process and normally the installation of new metres takes about 6 months for the entire procedure. About 7,500 metres had to be replaced/repaired and steps to procure durable water meters wherein the supplier will have responsibility to maintain the same for 6 years.
Further, the High Court as joined as a respondent Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in connection with the date for approval and implementation of the guidelines for sitting of industries, prepared by Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB). The guidelines for siting of Industries in North and South Goa prepared by GDPCB states that 32 industries have an impact potential to air and surface water pollution higher than the pollution receiving potential of the zones available for siting of industries in South and North Goa, which should be restricted from siting.
The report further states that it is not suitable to site industries with high and water pollution impact potential in these two districts since no dispersion of emissions and no dilution will be available for effluents if discharged in the rivers/ water bodies in the districts. The report adds that the rivers and water bodies are sources of water supply and irrigation in the districts and must be protected.
On approval of the same by CPCB, the Zonal Atlas for siting of Industries and Industrial siting guidelines will be forwarded to the state government for approval/ implementation.
A bounced check can actually land you in prison!
PANJIM: A bounced check can actually land you in prison! In an interesting case, the High Court has actually upheld the decision of the lower courts and sent the defaulter, Sunil Chandrashekar Jantli, to one-month simple imprisonment.
Jantli had filed a revision petition against two concurrent findings of the lower Courts holding him guilty under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 before the single bench of Justice NA Britto. The Courts had sentenced Jantli to undergo simple imprisonment for 30 days and also directed him to pay a sum of Rs 5 lakh by way of compensation.
However, the High Court dismissed the revision application as without any merits and asked the accused to "surrender forthwith" as there is no stay on the judgment of the Additional Sessions judge. On December 21, 2006, the Additional Sessions judge had stated that the accused was required to surrender within a period of four weeks for the purpose of undergoing the sentence.
Jantli got into trouble when Tome Hiltor De Oliveira, one of the four partners in M/s. Goa Mining Corporation filed a complaint against him. In his complaint he alleged that the accused had taken an advance sum of Rs 4 lakh from his firm to supply of ore. But as he couldn't supply the ore, as towards the repayment of the advanced sum, he gave the firm -- M/s. Goa Mining Corporation -- a cheque of Rs 4 lakh on November 26, 2004 on ICICI Bank, Panjim branch.
However, when the cheque was presented for collection it was returned dishonored for insufficiency of funds, alleged the complainant Oliveira. Later, when statutory notice was addressed to the accused on January 14, 2005 it was also returned unclaimed and therefore the complainant Oliveira prosecuted the accused under Section 138 of the said of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Before the High Court, Jantli's defense was twofold. First, the said cheque was obtained from him by practicing deceit and fraud, and the second, in his statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 he stated that the said cheque was issued as security towards some mutual understanding for future business, even without specifying what was the nature of the said future business.
However, the Court observed that the accused by taking the said two pleas landed neither here nor there in that the accused failed to translate the said pleas into evidence and upheld the lower Courts decision.
Jantli had filed a revision petition against two concurrent findings of the lower Courts holding him guilty under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 before the single bench of Justice NA Britto. The Courts had sentenced Jantli to undergo simple imprisonment for 30 days and also directed him to pay a sum of Rs 5 lakh by way of compensation.
However, the High Court dismissed the revision application as without any merits and asked the accused to "surrender forthwith" as there is no stay on the judgment of the Additional Sessions judge. On December 21, 2006, the Additional Sessions judge had stated that the accused was required to surrender within a period of four weeks for the purpose of undergoing the sentence.
Jantli got into trouble when Tome Hiltor De Oliveira, one of the four partners in M/s. Goa Mining Corporation filed a complaint against him. In his complaint he alleged that the accused had taken an advance sum of Rs 4 lakh from his firm to supply of ore. But as he couldn't supply the ore, as towards the repayment of the advanced sum, he gave the firm -- M/s. Goa Mining Corporation -- a cheque of Rs 4 lakh on November 26, 2004 on ICICI Bank, Panjim branch.
However, when the cheque was presented for collection it was returned dishonored for insufficiency of funds, alleged the complainant Oliveira. Later, when statutory notice was addressed to the accused on January 14, 2005 it was also returned unclaimed and therefore the complainant Oliveira prosecuted the accused under Section 138 of the said of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Before the High Court, Jantli's defense was twofold. First, the said cheque was obtained from him by practicing deceit and fraud, and the second, in his statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 he stated that the said cheque was issued as security towards some mutual understanding for future business, even without specifying what was the nature of the said future business.
However, the Court observed that the accused by taking the said two pleas landed neither here nor there in that the accused failed to translate the said pleas into evidence and upheld the lower Courts decision.
Can a convict be granted parole to visit his "ill" parents? How does the government define an illness as a serious one?
PANJIM: Can a convict be granted parole to visit his "ill" parents? How does the government define an illness as a serious one?
Answers to these otherwise complex questions that perturb the government has become simpler with the order of the single bench of Justice NA Britto in the Bombay High Court, Panjim bench who observed that not every illness is serious but an illness, which is likely to permanently or materially impair, the health of the prisoner could be considered to be serious.
The Court observed that Rule 324 provides as to when parole is to be granted. It states that parole may be granted to a prisoner in the event of emergent situations like death or serious illness of father, mother, brother, sister, spouse and children and also marriage of brother, sister and children.
He observed this while hearing to a petition filed by a convict Sher Singh for parole to visit his ailing father. Presently, he is lodged at Aguada jail. Singh is a convict who is undergoing sentence of twelve years under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act with effect from February 10, 2005.
The Court has directed the government to release Singh on parole for a period of 45 days with the condition that upon execution of a bond of Rs 15,000 with one surety in the like amount and with the further condition that the Petitioner shall report to the nearest police station at Kullu every alternate day.
By an application dated June 22, 2006, Singh had sought for his release on parole for a period of sixty days but it was rejected by the government on the grounds that he is a native of Kullu, Himachal Pradesh and, therefore, there was every possibility that he may take opportunity and jump the parole. So he approached the High Court.
The Court stated that considering the illness of the Singh's father, as certified by the Medical Officer, Regional Hospital, Kullu and by the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat at Arsu, the petitioner ought to have been granted parole as prayed for. The state government had made an inquiry through the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat at Arsu and it was learnt that the petitioner's father was undergoing treatment. Even Singh had produced a medical certificate issued by the Medical Officer, Regional Hospital, Kullu stating that his father was suffering from stricture urethera and was undergoing treatment at the hospital where he was required to undergo surgery and for that attendant was necessary to look after him during the said ailment.
Criticizing the government's move of denying parole, the Court observed that the government doesn't appear to have exercised its discretion rightly considering the medical report as well as the report of the Pradhan, which had further certified that the problem of the Petitioner's father was genuine.
Answers to these otherwise complex questions that perturb the government has become simpler with the order of the single bench of Justice NA Britto in the Bombay High Court, Panjim bench who observed that not every illness is serious but an illness, which is likely to permanently or materially impair, the health of the prisoner could be considered to be serious.
The Court observed that Rule 324 provides as to when parole is to be granted. It states that parole may be granted to a prisoner in the event of emergent situations like death or serious illness of father, mother, brother, sister, spouse and children and also marriage of brother, sister and children.
He observed this while hearing to a petition filed by a convict Sher Singh for parole to visit his ailing father. Presently, he is lodged at Aguada jail. Singh is a convict who is undergoing sentence of twelve years under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act with effect from February 10, 2005.
The Court has directed the government to release Singh on parole for a period of 45 days with the condition that upon execution of a bond of Rs 15,000 with one surety in the like amount and with the further condition that the Petitioner shall report to the nearest police station at Kullu every alternate day.
By an application dated June 22, 2006, Singh had sought for his release on parole for a period of sixty days but it was rejected by the government on the grounds that he is a native of Kullu, Himachal Pradesh and, therefore, there was every possibility that he may take opportunity and jump the parole. So he approached the High Court.
The Court stated that considering the illness of the Singh's father, as certified by the Medical Officer, Regional Hospital, Kullu and by the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat at Arsu, the petitioner ought to have been granted parole as prayed for. The state government had made an inquiry through the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat at Arsu and it was learnt that the petitioner's father was undergoing treatment. Even Singh had produced a medical certificate issued by the Medical Officer, Regional Hospital, Kullu stating that his father was suffering from stricture urethera and was undergoing treatment at the hospital where he was required to undergo surgery and for that attendant was necessary to look after him during the said ailment.
Criticizing the government's move of denying parole, the Court observed that the government doesn't appear to have exercised its discretion rightly considering the medical report as well as the report of the Pradhan, which had further certified that the problem of the Petitioner's father was genuine.
Can a son change his parents name after their death?
PANJIM: Can a son change his parents name after their death?
The Ministry of Law and Justice and Ministry of External Affairs,
Government of India, states, "There is no law under which any persons,
even the legal heirs of a deceased can change the name of a deceased.
Admittedly, a deceased person has throughout his life used the name,
which is sought to be changed, for official transactions during his
life period and now has legal heirs/ descendents can't for their
convenience, whatsoever, be allowed to change the name of the
deceased."
Upholding this stand of the Ministry of Law and Justice and Ministry
of External Affairs, even the Passport Officer, Panjim refuted
36-years-old John Michael Fortunato Fernandes argument to change the
name of his deceased parents.
When Michael applied for his first passport on June 18, 1990, he had
given his name as John Michael Fernandes and parent's name was given
as Sebastian and Lavina Fernandes. Later, in 1999, he again applied
for a new passport with the above names and also submitted a ration
card with the same names.
However, in 2005 he applied to the Passport department for a change of
name from John Michael Fernandes to John Michael Fortunato Fernandes
and also stated that his parents name be changed to Jose Florencio
Fernandes and Santana Carmelina Fernandes from Sebastian and Lavina
Fernandes. While the passport office changed his name in the passport,
they refused to change his parents' name.
Unhappy with this, Michael has now approached the Additional Sessions
Court, Panjim against the decision of the Passport officer. In his
suit for declaration and correction of name in the passport before
judge PV Kamat, when he desirous of proceeding abroad for employment
filed an application for passport and got a passport which allegedly
had wrongly incorporated his parents name as Sebastian and Lavina
Fernandes due to "typographical" error.
He further contended that based on the public documents (death
certificates), which are presumed to be true under the law, the
Passport Officer ought to have effected the necessary changes. The
counsel for the petitioner is BD Nazareth and the counsel for the
respondent is PG Narulkar.
However, the Passport office maintained that prima facie it appeared
impermissible since the same was sought to be done after the death of
the parents and even Goa Change of Nam and Surname doesn't permit it.
They added that Sebastian's moves clearly amount to act of
impersonation for reasons best known to the plaintiff.
The Ministry of Law and Justice and Ministry of External Affairs,
Government of India, states, "There is no law under which any persons,
even the legal heirs of a deceased can change the name of a deceased.
Admittedly, a deceased person has throughout his life used the name,
which is sought to be changed, for official transactions during his
life period and now has legal heirs/ descendents can't for their
convenience, whatsoever, be allowed to change the name of the
deceased."
Upholding this stand of the Ministry of Law and Justice and Ministry
of External Affairs, even the Passport Officer, Panjim refuted
36-years-old John Michael Fortunato Fernandes argument to change the
name of his deceased parents.
When Michael applied for his first passport on June 18, 1990, he had
given his name as John Michael Fernandes and parent's name was given
as Sebastian and Lavina Fernandes. Later, in 1999, he again applied
for a new passport with the above names and also submitted a ration
card with the same names.
However, in 2005 he applied to the Passport department for a change of
name from John Michael Fernandes to John Michael Fortunato Fernandes
and also stated that his parents name be changed to Jose Florencio
Fernandes and Santana Carmelina Fernandes from Sebastian and Lavina
Fernandes. While the passport office changed his name in the passport,
they refused to change his parents' name.
Unhappy with this, Michael has now approached the Additional Sessions
Court, Panjim against the decision of the Passport officer. In his
suit for declaration and correction of name in the passport before
judge PV Kamat, when he desirous of proceeding abroad for employment
filed an application for passport and got a passport which allegedly
had wrongly incorporated his parents name as Sebastian and Lavina
Fernandes due to "typographical" error.
He further contended that based on the public documents (death
certificates), which are presumed to be true under the law, the
Passport Officer ought to have effected the necessary changes. The
counsel for the petitioner is BD Nazareth and the counsel for the
respondent is PG Narulkar.
However, the Passport office maintained that prima facie it appeared
impermissible since the same was sought to be done after the death of
the parents and even Goa Change of Nam and Surname doesn't permit it.
They added that Sebastian's moves clearly amount to act of
impersonation for reasons best known to the plaintiff.
HC quashes "stop work" order issued to Aldei de Goa
PANJIM: The High Court has quashed the "stop work" order issued to
Goan Real Estate & Construction Ltd by North Goa Additional Collector
because according to the Ministry of Environment & Forests "it is an
on-going project". In other words, GRECL can carry on with their work
of constructing homes and a hotel.
Swapnil Naik, Additional Collector, North Goa had turned down the
request of Goan Real Estate & Construction Ltd (GRECL) to cancel the
stop work order, stating that their project is an "ongoing" project.
GRECL backed by a letter from Director, Ministry of Environment &
Forests, who clarified that the construction activities in the zone
between 50 to 100 metres would attract the provisions of CRZ
notification from the date of orders of Supreme Court dated April 18,
1996 for undertaking any new developmental activities, requested to
cancel the stop work order.
Director, MoEF had further clarified, "any developmental activity
which had been initiated between August 18, 1994 and April 18, 1996
after obtaining all requisite clearances from concerned agencies
including from the TCP could be constructed as an on-going project."
It must be recalled that Naik had issued a stay order against illegal
construction/ development work carried out in survey number 12/1 and
99 by violating the CRZ guidelines and for violating section 17 (2) of
Town and Country Plan Act by indulging in large scale hill cutting in
survey no 95/1 and 96/12 of Bambolim village after the Gpa Bachao
Abhiyan (GBA) brought to the notice of the authorities mass
destruction by GRECL.
GRECL maintained that on May 31, 1995, Chief Town Planner, TCP
department and other concerned authorities approve the Development
Plan submitted by Goan Real Estate & Construction Ltd (GRECL) for
construction and development of residential houses and a hotel. On
July 31, 1995, Curca village panchayat issues construction license to
the GRECL, which is again later renewed for three years on October 18,
1998. They added that they are carrying out the development work from
1998 to 2006 and the project is under construction and incomplete.
However, Nail discharged the stay order to the extent that the
constructions beyond 100 mts line as demarcated from the present
position of river bank can be started as per the approval plan from
the TCP department, panchayat and other authorities. He added, "Any
further construction on the structures marked A, B and C on the plan
can't be started since these are within the 100 mts line. Further,
this order doesn't absolve the developer from the responsibility of
obtaining any other permission for cutting of hill, trees etc as per
the Rules".
Interestingly, on August 18, 1994, by way of amendment to the
notification, the area around the banks of rive affected by tidal
impact to which restriction applied was initially 100 mts is reduced
to 50 mts. However, on April 18, 1996, the Supreme Court had set aside
the part of this notification, restoring the area around the river to
100 mts for imposing restrictions.
GRECL also made representation to Goa Coastal Zone Management
Authority stating that the work is being carried out in terms of the
sanctioned plans and the stop work notice was unjustified.
However, when the GCZMA in its meeting on July 28, 2007 apprised the
members of the observations made out by MoEF that the project
undertaken by GRECL after a long gap of 12 years should be construed
as an on going project and that approval of 50 mts NDZ holds, the
members observed, "It can't be construed as an on-going project
because earlier only plinth level was constructed and thereafter
nothing was done for 12 years" and decided to demarcate 100 mts NDZ.
Goan Real Estate & Construction Ltd by North Goa Additional Collector
because according to the Ministry of Environment & Forests "it is an
on-going project". In other words, GRECL can carry on with their work
of constructing homes and a hotel.
Swapnil Naik, Additional Collector, North Goa had turned down the
request of Goan Real Estate & Construction Ltd (GRECL) to cancel the
stop work order, stating that their project is an "ongoing" project.
GRECL backed by a letter from Director, Ministry of Environment &
Forests, who clarified that the construction activities in the zone
between 50 to 100 metres would attract the provisions of CRZ
notification from the date of orders of Supreme Court dated April 18,
1996 for undertaking any new developmental activities, requested to
cancel the stop work order.
Director, MoEF had further clarified, "any developmental activity
which had been initiated between August 18, 1994 and April 18, 1996
after obtaining all requisite clearances from concerned agencies
including from the TCP could be constructed as an on-going project."
It must be recalled that Naik had issued a stay order against illegal
construction/ development work carried out in survey number 12/1 and
99 by violating the CRZ guidelines and for violating section 17 (2) of
Town and Country Plan Act by indulging in large scale hill cutting in
survey no 95/1 and 96/12 of Bambolim village after the Gpa Bachao
Abhiyan (GBA) brought to the notice of the authorities mass
destruction by GRECL.
GRECL maintained that on May 31, 1995, Chief Town Planner, TCP
department and other concerned authorities approve the Development
Plan submitted by Goan Real Estate & Construction Ltd (GRECL) for
construction and development of residential houses and a hotel. On
July 31, 1995, Curca village panchayat issues construction license to
the GRECL, which is again later renewed for three years on October 18,
1998. They added that they are carrying out the development work from
1998 to 2006 and the project is under construction and incomplete.
However, Nail discharged the stay order to the extent that the
constructions beyond 100 mts line as demarcated from the present
position of river bank can be started as per the approval plan from
the TCP department, panchayat and other authorities. He added, "Any
further construction on the structures marked A, B and C on the plan
can't be started since these are within the 100 mts line. Further,
this order doesn't absolve the developer from the responsibility of
obtaining any other permission for cutting of hill, trees etc as per
the Rules".
Interestingly, on August 18, 1994, by way of amendment to the
notification, the area around the banks of rive affected by tidal
impact to which restriction applied was initially 100 mts is reduced
to 50 mts. However, on April 18, 1996, the Supreme Court had set aside
the part of this notification, restoring the area around the river to
100 mts for imposing restrictions.
GRECL also made representation to Goa Coastal Zone Management
Authority stating that the work is being carried out in terms of the
sanctioned plans and the stop work notice was unjustified.
However, when the GCZMA in its meeting on July 28, 2007 apprised the
members of the observations made out by MoEF that the project
undertaken by GRECL after a long gap of 12 years should be construed
as an on going project and that approval of 50 mts NDZ holds, the
members observed, "It can't be construed as an on-going project
because earlier only plinth level was constructed and thereafter
nothing was done for 12 years" and decided to demarcate 100 mts NDZ.
admissions to Goa College of Architecture (GCA) will be
PANJIM: The admissions to Goa College of Architecture (GCA) will be
stalled for sometime.
The Supreme Court has ordered to maintain status quo regarding
admissions to GCA after the Council for Architecture (CoA) approached
the Supreme Court, challenging the order of High Court of Goa at
Panjim, which had granted permission to the state government to go
ahead with the permissions.
The counsel for CoA, Naveen Nath, approached the Supreme Court stating
that the High Court had passed an order without giving CoA a fair
hearing. He also submitted that the High Court has itself admitted
that the college has failed to maintain minimum standards required to
run an architecture college and therefore the college shouldn't be
allowed to go ahead with admissions.
After hearing the counsel on July 25, the Court ordered to maintain
status quo till the final hearing on August 3. In other words, the
letter dated June 14, 2007 to the officiating principal and a public
notice on July 7, 2007 put by CoA communicating to the students
desirous to take admission into first year BArch course that GCA has
been put under "No admission" for the Academic Session 2007-08 stands
till final hearing on August 3.
Meanwhile, the Technical Education department has already conducted
the first round of admission on July 24, 2007. They have admitted 12
students on the spot to GCA and asked them to attend classes
immediately. The total number of seats available in the first in year
of architecture course at the GCA is 30. Reliable sources at Technical
Education reveal that the second round of admission would be held on
August 1, 2007.
But now the fate of 30 students is uncertain till the final order of
the Supreme Court on August 3. It must be recalled that CoA had
stopped the admissions to GCA, as the college had failed to fully
comply with the minimum standards and requirements lay down by CoA.
However, the Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto
at High Court of Bombay, Panjim bench, had rejected this argument
stating that CoA can't directly freeze the admission of students to a
college and had not followed the procedures.
stalled for sometime.
The Supreme Court has ordered to maintain status quo regarding
admissions to GCA after the Council for Architecture (CoA) approached
the Supreme Court, challenging the order of High Court of Goa at
Panjim, which had granted permission to the state government to go
ahead with the permissions.
The counsel for CoA, Naveen Nath, approached the Supreme Court stating
that the High Court had passed an order without giving CoA a fair
hearing. He also submitted that the High Court has itself admitted
that the college has failed to maintain minimum standards required to
run an architecture college and therefore the college shouldn't be
allowed to go ahead with admissions.
After hearing the counsel on July 25, the Court ordered to maintain
status quo till the final hearing on August 3. In other words, the
letter dated June 14, 2007 to the officiating principal and a public
notice on July 7, 2007 put by CoA communicating to the students
desirous to take admission into first year BArch course that GCA has
been put under "No admission" for the Academic Session 2007-08 stands
till final hearing on August 3.
Meanwhile, the Technical Education department has already conducted
the first round of admission on July 24, 2007. They have admitted 12
students on the spot to GCA and asked them to attend classes
immediately. The total number of seats available in the first in year
of architecture course at the GCA is 30. Reliable sources at Technical
Education reveal that the second round of admission would be held on
August 1, 2007.
But now the fate of 30 students is uncertain till the final order of
the Supreme Court on August 3. It must be recalled that CoA had
stopped the admissions to GCA, as the college had failed to fully
comply with the minimum standards and requirements lay down by CoA.
However, the Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto
at High Court of Bombay, Panjim bench, had rejected this argument
stating that CoA can't directly freeze the admission of students to a
college and had not followed the procedures.
Hotel in Goa violating CRZ
PANJIM: The whip is clearly on the hoteliers who indulge in CRZ
violation in Goa, what with the High Court getting taking stringent
action against the hotels which indulge in CRZ violation.
After Vanila Lounge, the three other hotels -- La Calypso, Hotel
Estrela do Mar and Shree Par Fragrance face the demolition axe, though
partially. As per the report submitted by the North Goa Collector, few
structures of La Calypso, Hotel Estrela do Mar and Shree Par Fragrance
fall within the CRZ.
Meanwhile, the counsel for Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority
(GCZMA) Subodh Kantak submitted to the Court that while they have
already issued demolition notice to La Calypso as per the report
submitted by the Collector, they have issued show cause notice to
Shree Par Fragrance in terms of the report of the Collector and matter
would be taken to its logical conclusion within 3 months. So far as
Hotel Estrela do Mar is concerned, advocate Kantak stated that they
would soon be issuing demolition notice as per the report of the
Collector.
The Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto while
disposing of a petition filed by Floriano Lobo has asked the three
hotels to deposit a sum of Rs 5000 each within a period of one week to
the petitioner as compensation.
Lobo, after perusing the report filed by the Collector (North) on the
extent of CRZ violation carried out by La Calypso, Hotel Estrela do
Mar and Shree Par Fragrance had made his submission before the High
Court. He submitted that four structures in La Calypso are within the
200 metres from the HTL.
He further submitted that in hotel Estrela do Mar, the total built up
area beyond 200 metres from HTL is in excess of 33 percent, which is
permissible maximum limit. Further, he also submitted that there is no
permission of the Environment Ministry or GCZMA for construction of
six structures and is illegal.
As regards to Shree Par Fragrance, Lobo submitted that no permission
has been sought from Environment Ministry or GCZMA and all structures,
including the temporary ones fall within 500 meters of HTL. He also
stated that there is an on-going enquiry before the Deputy Collector
of Bardez at Mapusa against Shree Par Fragrance for cutting and
destroying the sand dunes within the property.
violation in Goa, what with the High Court getting taking stringent
action against the hotels which indulge in CRZ violation.
After Vanila Lounge, the three other hotels -- La Calypso, Hotel
Estrela do Mar and Shree Par Fragrance face the demolition axe, though
partially. As per the report submitted by the North Goa Collector, few
structures of La Calypso, Hotel Estrela do Mar and Shree Par Fragrance
fall within the CRZ.
Meanwhile, the counsel for Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority
(GCZMA) Subodh Kantak submitted to the Court that while they have
already issued demolition notice to La Calypso as per the report
submitted by the Collector, they have issued show cause notice to
Shree Par Fragrance in terms of the report of the Collector and matter
would be taken to its logical conclusion within 3 months. So far as
Hotel Estrela do Mar is concerned, advocate Kantak stated that they
would soon be issuing demolition notice as per the report of the
Collector.
The Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto while
disposing of a petition filed by Floriano Lobo has asked the three
hotels to deposit a sum of Rs 5000 each within a period of one week to
the petitioner as compensation.
Lobo, after perusing the report filed by the Collector (North) on the
extent of CRZ violation carried out by La Calypso, Hotel Estrela do
Mar and Shree Par Fragrance had made his submission before the High
Court. He submitted that four structures in La Calypso are within the
200 metres from the HTL.
He further submitted that in hotel Estrela do Mar, the total built up
area beyond 200 metres from HTL is in excess of 33 percent, which is
permissible maximum limit. Further, he also submitted that there is no
permission of the Environment Ministry or GCZMA for construction of
six structures and is illegal.
As regards to Shree Par Fragrance, Lobo submitted that no permission
has been sought from Environment Ministry or GCZMA and all structures,
including the temporary ones fall within 500 meters of HTL. He also
stated that there is an on-going enquiry before the Deputy Collector
of Bardez at Mapusa against Shree Par Fragrance for cutting and
destroying the sand dunes within the property.
High Court orders inspection of Cuncolim units
PANJIM: Goa Pollution Control Board (GPCB) has been asked by the High
Court to inspect the nine industrial units in Cuncolim, allegedly
producing hazardous and non-hazardous waste, and check out whether
they have complied with the National Environmental Engineering
Research Institute (NEERI) recommendations.
Once the inspection is over, they would have to submit a report to the
Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto.
Further, the state government has been asked make a statement on
affidavit about how long it will take to set up the hazardous waste
landfill site in Dharbondara, which falls in Sanvordem constituency.
The Court was hearing the petition filed by Oscar Martins, against the
nine industrial units in Cuncolim, which are producing hazardous, and
non-hazardous waste.
The counsel for the petitioner, Aires Rodrigues, stated that two
companies - Sunrise Zinc Ltd and Nicomet - continue to produce
hazardous waste and there is need for a landfill site as between the
two, they are produce 18 tonnes of hazardous waste. This is as per the
NERI report. The Court then asked the government how long it would
take for them to set up the landfill site for disposition of hazardous
waste.
Later, hearing the petition filed by Ratnakar Dessai, also against the
pollution caused by the industrial units operating in Cuncolim
industrial estate and how it has led to the destruction of fields,
nullahs and storm water drains, the Court has asked Water Resources
and Agriculture department to take immediate steps.
The two departments have been asked to assess the extent of damage to
the fields and submit a report regarding the damage of the fields and
canal. Further, Water Resources department has been asked to inspect
whether any industrial units are dumping their waste, hazardous or
non-hazardous, into the storm water drains and nullahs.
Water Resources department has also been asked by the Court to issue
prior notices regarding inspection to the amicus curiae Advocate Tamba
and concerned respondents, to enable the concerned parties to remain
present at the time of inspection
Court to inspect the nine industrial units in Cuncolim, allegedly
producing hazardous and non-hazardous waste, and check out whether
they have complied with the National Environmental Engineering
Research Institute (NEERI) recommendations.
Once the inspection is over, they would have to submit a report to the
Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto.
Further, the state government has been asked make a statement on
affidavit about how long it will take to set up the hazardous waste
landfill site in Dharbondara, which falls in Sanvordem constituency.
The Court was hearing the petition filed by Oscar Martins, against the
nine industrial units in Cuncolim, which are producing hazardous, and
non-hazardous waste.
The counsel for the petitioner, Aires Rodrigues, stated that two
companies - Sunrise Zinc Ltd and Nicomet - continue to produce
hazardous waste and there is need for a landfill site as between the
two, they are produce 18 tonnes of hazardous waste. This is as per the
NERI report. The Court then asked the government how long it would
take for them to set up the landfill site for disposition of hazardous
waste.
Later, hearing the petition filed by Ratnakar Dessai, also against the
pollution caused by the industrial units operating in Cuncolim
industrial estate and how it has led to the destruction of fields,
nullahs and storm water drains, the Court has asked Water Resources
and Agriculture department to take immediate steps.
The two departments have been asked to assess the extent of damage to
the fields and submit a report regarding the damage of the fields and
canal. Further, Water Resources department has been asked to inspect
whether any industrial units are dumping their waste, hazardous or
non-hazardous, into the storm water drains and nullahs.
Water Resources department has also been asked by the Court to issue
prior notices regarding inspection to the amicus curiae Advocate Tamba
and concerned respondents, to enable the concerned parties to remain
present at the time of inspection
Petition against Goa MLA's
PANJIM: Five separate petitions were filed in the High Court yesterday. While one petition each was filed against UGDP MLA Babush Monserrate, Independent candidates Anil Salgaocar and Vishwajeet Rane, two petitions were filed against Finance Minister Dayanand Narvekar calling in question their election to the state Assembly.
The 45 days period from the date of election as required under section 81 of the Representation of People's Act, 1951 for filing election related petition ended yesterday.
The Goa Assembly elections were held on June 2 and the results were declared on June 5.
According to reliable sources, while the petitions against Salgaocar, Rane and Narvekar dealt with alleged over-expenditure during the election campaign, the petition against Babush challenged the improper acceptance of his nomination paper and asked for his election to be declared void.
Naresh Shigoamkar of CPI (M) has alleged that Salgaocar dug 13 bore wells in seven villages in Sanvordem constituency and also provided ambulances to the villagers. In his petition Shigoamkar alleged that the total expenditure by Salgaocar during the election campaign was more than Rs 6 lakh, which is therefore more than Rs 5 lakh permitted to be spent during the elections by the Election Commission. He has alleged that Salgaocar has indulged in corrupt practice in his petition.
On the other hand, Puti Gaonkar in his petition against Rane has alleged that the junior Rane has distributed 600 wrist watches having symbols of aeroplane and his photos in the constituency. It is also alleged that Rane had distributed television sets and sewing machines to the people in his constituency Valpoi. Besides, he also allegedly held mahila melava at various places and the petitioner sited 10 instances when it was held at the supporters place.
It is learned that Somnath Zuwarkar in his petition has submitted that the election of Babush is liable to be declared void in view of the fact that his nomination paper was improperly accepted. Zuwarkar has stated that when Babush filed his nomination as a candidate set up by UGDP, he was a member of the Legislative Assembly, belonging to the Indian National Congress. He has further stated that the Returning Officer had no jurisdiction to allow Babush to produce either documentary evidence or affidavit to prove that he had become a member of UGDP and submitted that Babush's nomination was improperly accepted by the RO.
The petitions against Narvekar were filed by his political opponent during the elections Fermina Khaunte and Pradeep Khaunte.
The 45 days period from the date of election as required under section 81 of the Representation of People's Act, 1951 for filing election related petition ended yesterday.
The Goa Assembly elections were held on June 2 and the results were declared on June 5.
According to reliable sources, while the petitions against Salgaocar, Rane and Narvekar dealt with alleged over-expenditure during the election campaign, the petition against Babush challenged the improper acceptance of his nomination paper and asked for his election to be declared void.
Naresh Shigoamkar of CPI (M) has alleged that Salgaocar dug 13 bore wells in seven villages in Sanvordem constituency and also provided ambulances to the villagers. In his petition Shigoamkar alleged that the total expenditure by Salgaocar during the election campaign was more than Rs 6 lakh, which is therefore more than Rs 5 lakh permitted to be spent during the elections by the Election Commission. He has alleged that Salgaocar has indulged in corrupt practice in his petition.
On the other hand, Puti Gaonkar in his petition against Rane has alleged that the junior Rane has distributed 600 wrist watches having symbols of aeroplane and his photos in the constituency. It is also alleged that Rane had distributed television sets and sewing machines to the people in his constituency Valpoi. Besides, he also allegedly held mahila melava at various places and the petitioner sited 10 instances when it was held at the supporters place.
It is learned that Somnath Zuwarkar in his petition has submitted that the election of Babush is liable to be declared void in view of the fact that his nomination paper was improperly accepted. Zuwarkar has stated that when Babush filed his nomination as a candidate set up by UGDP, he was a member of the Legislative Assembly, belonging to the Indian National Congress. He has further stated that the Returning Officer had no jurisdiction to allow Babush to produce either documentary evidence or affidavit to prove that he had become a member of UGDP and submitted that Babush's nomination was improperly accepted by the RO.
The petitions against Narvekar were filed by his political opponent during the elections Fermina Khaunte and Pradeep Khaunte.
Big B need not be present in the court
PANJIM: Bollywood shenshah Amitabh Bachchan doesn't remain to be present in the Court during hearing of a complaint filed by National Organisation for Tobacco Eradication (NOTE).
The High Court after hearing the matter has issued a stay on the process issued by the Trial Court. The Sessions Court, Panjim, had dismissed the revision application filed by M/s Amitabh Bachchan Corporation Limited (ABCL), Mumbai.
M/s ABCL had approached the Sessions Court praying that pending the hearings and disposal of the revision application, the process issued by the Judicial Magistrate First Class be stayed and sought ad-interim ex-parte relief. In their revision application, M/s ABCL claimed that there was no prima facie case and that the JMFC ought not to have issued process against them and Bachchan, who is the chairman of the company.
However, Sessions Court judge U Bakre dismissed the revision application. In other words, the JMFC's order on November 21 stands. On November 21, the trial Court had issued summons to Amitabh Bachchan, Keshu Ramsay, M/s DMS Films Private Limited, Mumbai and M/s Anchor Daewoo India Limited to appear before the court on November 29, following a complaint filed by NOTE on January 25, 2006, for displaying hoardings showing Amitabh Bachchan smoking a cigar and endorsing an electrical appliance of M/s Anchor Daewoo India Limited under the brand name `Anchor.'
According to NOTE, the hoardings were in gross violation of Cigarettes and Tobacco and other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulations of the Trade and Commerce, Production Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 and under section 7 of Goa Prohibition of Smoking and Spitting Act, 1997.
Keshu Ramsay is the director of M/s DMS Films Private Limited, Mumbai and co-producer of the film `Family' along with M/s ABCL, Mumbai.
The High Court after hearing the matter has issued a stay on the process issued by the Trial Court. The Sessions Court, Panjim, had dismissed the revision application filed by M/s Amitabh Bachchan Corporation Limited (ABCL), Mumbai.
M/s ABCL had approached the Sessions Court praying that pending the hearings and disposal of the revision application, the process issued by the Judicial Magistrate First Class be stayed and sought ad-interim ex-parte relief. In their revision application, M/s ABCL claimed that there was no prima facie case and that the JMFC ought not to have issued process against them and Bachchan, who is the chairman of the company.
However, Sessions Court judge U Bakre dismissed the revision application. In other words, the JMFC's order on November 21 stands. On November 21, the trial Court had issued summons to Amitabh Bachchan, Keshu Ramsay, M/s DMS Films Private Limited, Mumbai and M/s Anchor Daewoo India Limited to appear before the court on November 29, following a complaint filed by NOTE on January 25, 2006, for displaying hoardings showing Amitabh Bachchan smoking a cigar and endorsing an electrical appliance of M/s Anchor Daewoo India Limited under the brand name `Anchor.'
According to NOTE, the hoardings were in gross violation of Cigarettes and Tobacco and other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulations of the Trade and Commerce, Production Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 and under section 7 of Goa Prohibition of Smoking and Spitting Act, 1997.
Keshu Ramsay is the director of M/s DMS Films Private Limited, Mumbai and co-producer of the film `Family' along with M/s ABCL, Mumbai.
What happens when the Panchayat fails to listen to people's complaints?
PANJIM: What happens when the Panchayat fails to listen to people's complaints? They have to shell out Rs 10,000 as compensation.
The Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto has asked Candolim Panchayat to pay compensation of Rs 5000 each to the petitioner Dr Jairam Karmalkar and amicus curiae Norma Alvares.
Karmalkar had written to the Court of December 5, 2006 regarding violation of Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000 and the CRZ notification by Vanilla Lounge Bar, which is operational since January 2005. The letter, later converted into a PIL, stated that the lounge bar openly flaunts deafening amplified sound of music, bursting of firecrackers and the vehicles moving to this location blare their vehicular horns throughout the night due to which they are unable to sleep. They also stated that despite their repeated complaints and protests no action was taken.
While disposing off the PIL, the Court has asked the Panchayat to issue a show cause notice within 10 days to Vanilla Lounge and take a final action within 60 days. The permission from the Panchayat to construct a temporary structure expired on May 31, 2007.
Meanwhile, the owners of Vanila Lounge Bar has filed a petition yesterday challenging the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority's demolition order of June 11, 2007 directing Vanila Lounge to demolish the structure. They have also challenged the validity of the notification dated February 19, 1991 of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, as the same purports to apply to non-industrial premises or structures.
Stating that the Vanila Lounge is a temporary structure, the petition submitted that no permission under Environment (Protection) Act or Rules or Notifications issued there under, is necessary or required for erecting temporary structures in CRZ since temporary structures have temporary periods and they are removable after the expiry of the periods.
(an earlier version appeared in Gomantak Times, Panaji edition, Goa)
The Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto has asked Candolim Panchayat to pay compensation of Rs 5000 each to the petitioner Dr Jairam Karmalkar and amicus curiae Norma Alvares.
Karmalkar had written to the Court of December 5, 2006 regarding violation of Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000 and the CRZ notification by Vanilla Lounge Bar, which is operational since January 2005. The letter, later converted into a PIL, stated that the lounge bar openly flaunts deafening amplified sound of music, bursting of firecrackers and the vehicles moving to this location blare their vehicular horns throughout the night due to which they are unable to sleep. They also stated that despite their repeated complaints and protests no action was taken.
While disposing off the PIL, the Court has asked the Panchayat to issue a show cause notice within 10 days to Vanilla Lounge and take a final action within 60 days. The permission from the Panchayat to construct a temporary structure expired on May 31, 2007.
Meanwhile, the owners of Vanila Lounge Bar has filed a petition yesterday challenging the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority's demolition order of June 11, 2007 directing Vanila Lounge to demolish the structure. They have also challenged the validity of the notification dated February 19, 1991 of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, as the same purports to apply to non-industrial premises or structures.
Stating that the Vanila Lounge is a temporary structure, the petition submitted that no permission under Environment (Protection) Act or Rules or Notifications issued there under, is necessary or required for erecting temporary structures in CRZ since temporary structures have temporary periods and they are removable after the expiry of the periods.
(an earlier version appeared in Gomantak Times, Panaji edition, Goa)
What does the government do with the recyclable non-biodegradable waste?
PANJIM: What does the government do with the recyclable non-biodegradable waste?
With the government failing to give an accurate reply, the High Court has asked the government to have an overall plan of action, especially for plastic and paper waste.
The Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto further asked the Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB) to prepare a scheme regarding recycling of waste and the Department of Science, Technology and Environment to get a senior scientist to report what is to be done with the recyclable non-biodegradable waste. The report has to be submitted to the Court, which is hearing a PIL filed by Floriano Lobo regarding garbage disposal and landfill sites.
While the 13 municipal councils and corporation have identified landfill sites and some have got permissions from GSPCB to ensure that the sites is functional within 6 months, of the 189 village Panchayats, 122 Panchayats have selected the site for garbage disposal.
Director of Municipal Administration Daulat Hawaldar and Director of Panchayats Menino D'Souza, respectively, submitted this in their compliance reports. The Court has asked to join all municipal councils and corporation as respondents in order to inform to the Court their plan of action at the site once acquisition is complete.
Meanwhile, the Court has asked the Director of Panchayats to get clearance for pending 82 Panchayats from GSPCB within a period of 3 weeks and also directed them to look into the remaining Panchayats to identify the garbage disposal sites. While GSPCB has cleared 25 proposals till date, 17 have been rejected.
Since long, various Panchayats despite efforts had failed to have a proper garbage disposal site. To deal with the problem, the Panchayats department had formulated the "Rural Garbage Disposal Scheme 2005" for providing assistance to the Village Panchayats for collection, transportation, segregation, storage, processing and disposal of garbage in the Panchayat areas.
Under the scheme, various Panchayats were grouped into 43 clusters each comprising of 3 to 7 village Panchayats except Goltim-Navelim and Chodan-Madel (being islands) and one Panchayat in each cluster was designated as the Panchayat within whose jurisdiction the garbage is to be disposed off. The segregation, storage and disposal of the garbage collected from the cluster of Panchayats is the responsibility of the designated village Panchayat. Besides, they have also to identify a suitable land site and inform the BDO to refer it to GSPCB.
Once on obtaining clearance from GSPCB, they had to submit the proposal for acquisition of the land site to the Director of Panchayats for obtaining Administrative approval of the Government and for moving the proposal to government for acquisition of the land for recommending the proposal under the urgency clause of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
However, the scheme failed and had to be amended on April 23, 2007 to provide for individual village Panchayats to identify land sites within their jurisdiction and for disposal of their garbage in their areas, in case the designated village panchayat doesn't agree to receive their garbage. After the amendment of the scheme, most of the village Panchayats has now identified sites for the garbage disposal in their areas.
(an earlier version of the story appeared in Gomantak Times, Panaji Edition, Goa)
With the government failing to give an accurate reply, the High Court has asked the government to have an overall plan of action, especially for plastic and paper waste.
The Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto further asked the Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB) to prepare a scheme regarding recycling of waste and the Department of Science, Technology and Environment to get a senior scientist to report what is to be done with the recyclable non-biodegradable waste. The report has to be submitted to the Court, which is hearing a PIL filed by Floriano Lobo regarding garbage disposal and landfill sites.
While the 13 municipal councils and corporation have identified landfill sites and some have got permissions from GSPCB to ensure that the sites is functional within 6 months, of the 189 village Panchayats, 122 Panchayats have selected the site for garbage disposal.
Director of Municipal Administration Daulat Hawaldar and Director of Panchayats Menino D'Souza, respectively, submitted this in their compliance reports. The Court has asked to join all municipal councils and corporation as respondents in order to inform to the Court their plan of action at the site once acquisition is complete.
Meanwhile, the Court has asked the Director of Panchayats to get clearance for pending 82 Panchayats from GSPCB within a period of 3 weeks and also directed them to look into the remaining Panchayats to identify the garbage disposal sites. While GSPCB has cleared 25 proposals till date, 17 have been rejected.
Since long, various Panchayats despite efforts had failed to have a proper garbage disposal site. To deal with the problem, the Panchayats department had formulated the "Rural Garbage Disposal Scheme 2005" for providing assistance to the Village Panchayats for collection, transportation, segregation, storage, processing and disposal of garbage in the Panchayat areas.
Under the scheme, various Panchayats were grouped into 43 clusters each comprising of 3 to 7 village Panchayats except Goltim-Navelim and Chodan-Madel (being islands) and one Panchayat in each cluster was designated as the Panchayat within whose jurisdiction the garbage is to be disposed off. The segregation, storage and disposal of the garbage collected from the cluster of Panchayats is the responsibility of the designated village Panchayat. Besides, they have also to identify a suitable land site and inform the BDO to refer it to GSPCB.
Once on obtaining clearance from GSPCB, they had to submit the proposal for acquisition of the land site to the Director of Panchayats for obtaining Administrative approval of the Government and for moving the proposal to government for acquisition of the land for recommending the proposal under the urgency clause of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
However, the scheme failed and had to be amended on April 23, 2007 to provide for individual village Panchayats to identify land sites within their jurisdiction and for disposal of their garbage in their areas, in case the designated village panchayat doesn't agree to receive their garbage. After the amendment of the scheme, most of the village Panchayats has now identified sites for the garbage disposal in their areas.
(an earlier version of the story appeared in Gomantak Times, Panaji Edition, Goa)
Vanila Lounge Bar - Goa
PANJIM: The hot and happening party spot Vanila Lounge Bar will be totally removed and the place will be resorted back to its natural form within 14 days.
Rinan Ismail, partner at Vanila Lounge Bar, gave an undertaking to the High Court that that the structure will be totally removed and resorted back to its natural, original form within 14 days.
The Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto also made it clear that Vanila Lounge Bar will not be allowed to carry out any business in the premise. However, the Court has given them liberty to apply again next year for permissions to construct a structure or to obtain other necessary permissions as permitted under the law.
It must recalled that the owners of Vanila Lounge Bar had filed a petition on Tuesday, challenging the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority's demolition order of June 11, 2007 directing Vanila Lounge to demolish the structure. They have also challenged the validity of the notification dated February 19, 1991 of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, as the same purports to apply to non-industrial premises or structures.
Stating that the Vanila Lounge is a temporary structure, the petition submitted that no permission under Environment (Protection) Act or Rules or Notifications issued there under, is necessary or required for erecting temporary structures in CRZ since temporary structures have temporary periods and they are removable after the expiry of the periods.
Meanwhile, Vanila Lounge is at liberty to apply to the Panchayat not to initiate any action against them. It must be recalled that the High Court, w hile disposing off the PIL filed Dr Jairam Karmalkar had asked the Panchayat to issue a show cause notice within 10 days to Vanilla Lounge and take a final action within 60 days. The permission from the Panchayat to construct a temporary structure expired on May 31, 2007.
(an earlier version of the story appeared in Gomantak Times, Panaji edition)
Rinan Ismail, partner at Vanila Lounge Bar, gave an undertaking to the High Court that that the structure will be totally removed and resorted back to its natural, original form within 14 days.
The Division bench of Justice RS Mohite and Justice NA Britto also made it clear that Vanila Lounge Bar will not be allowed to carry out any business in the premise. However, the Court has given them liberty to apply again next year for permissions to construct a structure or to obtain other necessary permissions as permitted under the law.
It must recalled that the owners of Vanila Lounge Bar had filed a petition on Tuesday, challenging the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority's demolition order of June 11, 2007 directing Vanila Lounge to demolish the structure. They have also challenged the validity of the notification dated February 19, 1991 of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, as the same purports to apply to non-industrial premises or structures.
Stating that the Vanila Lounge is a temporary structure, the petition submitted that no permission under Environment (Protection) Act or Rules or Notifications issued there under, is necessary or required for erecting temporary structures in CRZ since temporary structures have temporary periods and they are removable after the expiry of the periods.
Meanwhile, Vanila Lounge is at liberty to apply to the Panchayat not to initiate any action against them. It must be recalled that the High Court, w hile disposing off the PIL filed Dr Jairam Karmalkar had asked the Panchayat to issue a show cause notice within 10 days to Vanilla Lounge and take a final action within 60 days. The permission from the Panchayat to construct a temporary structure expired on May 31, 2007.
(an earlier version of the story appeared in Gomantak Times, Panaji edition)
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Curca must wait longer! Garbage problem in Goa
by PREETU NAIR
PANJIM:
September 25, 2006: In the minutes of order submitted to the High Court of Bombay at Panjim, all parties concerned with the Curca garbage site - the Curca villagers (petitioners) and respondent state government, Corporation of City of Panjim (CCP) and Goa State Urban Development Authority (GSUDA) -- agreed to go ahead with capping the site. The work was estimated to be completed by May 30, 2007 and the expenditure sanctioned was Rs 1,09,64,625.
March 20, 2007: GSUDA comes up with a revised time schedule. The work of capping is now postponed by almost a year and is scheduled to be completed by March 31, 2008. Meanwhile, to prevent rainwater from percolating into the waste dump, GSUDA makes temporary arrangements to cover the Municipal waste dump with silpaulin, which is thinner than tarpaulin.
October 2007: Advocate General Subodh Kantak orally informs the High Court that the government was examining another proposal. He said that instead of capping the site, the government was looking into another proposal to shift the garbage to another site before the following monsoon. An application to this effect would be made in another week, he had informed the Court (the matter is yet to be placed on Board).
There is no method to this madness: after a year of planning, the government now proposes to shift the garbage, a proposal that they had disposed off much earlier, because it was not feasible.
Capping not feasible
"Capping of the Curca garbage site doesn't solve the problem. According to our expert's report, we should segregate the garbage. While the solid waste would be removed to the landfill site at Baingunim, the wet waste would be processed at the site itself and converted into manure," stated Chief Secretary JP Singh.
In fact, the government had decided to go ahead with capping the site relying on a report prepared by Mahabal Enviro Engineers Pvt Ltd., Pune, which was selected by GSUDA as the consultant for execution of the capping work.
Mahabal Enviro Engineers Pvt Ltd. in their plan "The Capping and Closure Plan of Municipal Solid Waste Dump at Curca" ruled out transportation not only because of lack of an alternate site but said: "at the most, the heap appearing over and above the ground level can be transported out. The earlier quarry has a depth of about seven metres below ground level. And this much municipal solid waste (MSW) can't be transported out immediately".
The consultants also looked into the possibility of incineration, as the existing MSW appeared to have good calorific value (judging from the combustion experienced); converting into compost, as the existing municipal solid wastes (MSW) appears to have good fertilizing value (judging from the bushes grown on the dump) ruled out both options as vermin-composting was once attempted by CCP (then Panjim Municipal Council) and took time.
And finally it was suggested that remediation by capping with best possible precautions would be the best option, which was accepted by one and all. But just when the Curca residents thought that the government would bring an end to their garbage woes by capping the Curca garbage site latest by March 31, 2008, the state government has sprung up a new surprise.
But hasn't the decision come a wee-bit too late? "We came to this conclusion on the basis of a report submitted to us by an expert Dr Mahale," added Singh.
Joaquim at sea?
Surprisingly, Urban Development Minister Joaquim Alemao stated that he is not aware of the change in the plans. "I am not aware of this development", he said.
Even the officials at GSUDA are surprised with the sudden government decision.
"The High Court had asked CCP to cap and close the solid waste accumulated at the site. On CCP's request, the state government entrusted the work to GSUDA. But when we were about to issue a work order to cap the site, government asked us not to go ahead with the capping", informed Daulat Hawaldar, Member Secretary, GSUDA.
In the past, with the CCP failing to take the "Cradle to Grave" precautions of solid waste, the Curca garbage site had become prone to spontaneous local fire due to combustible part that also generated odour due to organic part and created water pollution due to run-off from rains, causing problems for people in the downstream and down gradient habitations in Curca.
Forced by circumstances and an indifferent state government, the Curca-Bambolim-Telaulim panchayat approached the High Court praying that the CCP be directed to remove and dispose the accumulated garbage (approximately 1.75 lakh metric tonnes) in a time-bound manner. This move forced the government to get its act together and they recommended capping and closing of the site.
But now with the government coming up with another plan, it may just be another long wait for the Curca residents!
How the capping was planned
According to the plan, garbage was to be leveled into a rectangular patch and compacted before a 45 cm thick layer of granular soil and another 60 cm thick layer of clay was placed on it. Then it was planned to cap the area, spread over 14,820 square metres, with a 30 cm thick layer of vegetative soil, with grass planted for holding the soil in place and in an effort to curtail the seepage of rainwater into the ground. Further, to minimize the possibility of leachate penetrating the water table, two bore wells were planned to be drilled below the depth of 10 metres for the purpose of pumping out leachate and treating it through a physico-chemical process. It was also decided to keep a daily watch on contents and document quantity, if it was pumped to the collection tank of physico-chemical treatment.
PANJIM:
September 25, 2006: In the minutes of order submitted to the High Court of Bombay at Panjim, all parties concerned with the Curca garbage site - the Curca villagers (petitioners) and respondent state government, Corporation of City of Panjim (CCP) and Goa State Urban Development Authority (GSUDA) -- agreed to go ahead with capping the site. The work was estimated to be completed by May 30, 2007 and the expenditure sanctioned was Rs 1,09,64,625.
March 20, 2007: GSUDA comes up with a revised time schedule. The work of capping is now postponed by almost a year and is scheduled to be completed by March 31, 2008. Meanwhile, to prevent rainwater from percolating into the waste dump, GSUDA makes temporary arrangements to cover the Municipal waste dump with silpaulin, which is thinner than tarpaulin.
October 2007: Advocate General Subodh Kantak orally informs the High Court that the government was examining another proposal. He said that instead of capping the site, the government was looking into another proposal to shift the garbage to another site before the following monsoon. An application to this effect would be made in another week, he had informed the Court (the matter is yet to be placed on Board).
There is no method to this madness: after a year of planning, the government now proposes to shift the garbage, a proposal that they had disposed off much earlier, because it was not feasible.
Capping not feasible
"Capping of the Curca garbage site doesn't solve the problem. According to our expert's report, we should segregate the garbage. While the solid waste would be removed to the landfill site at Baingunim, the wet waste would be processed at the site itself and converted into manure," stated Chief Secretary JP Singh.
In fact, the government had decided to go ahead with capping the site relying on a report prepared by Mahabal Enviro Engineers Pvt Ltd., Pune, which was selected by GSUDA as the consultant for execution of the capping work.
Mahabal Enviro Engineers Pvt Ltd. in their plan "The Capping and Closure Plan of Municipal Solid Waste Dump at Curca" ruled out transportation not only because of lack of an alternate site but said: "at the most, the heap appearing over and above the ground level can be transported out. The earlier quarry has a depth of about seven metres below ground level. And this much municipal solid waste (MSW) can't be transported out immediately".
The consultants also looked into the possibility of incineration, as the existing MSW appeared to have good calorific value (judging from the combustion experienced); converting into compost, as the existing municipal solid wastes (MSW) appears to have good fertilizing value (judging from the bushes grown on the dump) ruled out both options as vermin-composting was once attempted by CCP (then Panjim Municipal Council) and took time.
And finally it was suggested that remediation by capping with best possible precautions would be the best option, which was accepted by one and all. But just when the Curca residents thought that the government would bring an end to their garbage woes by capping the Curca garbage site latest by March 31, 2008, the state government has sprung up a new surprise.
But hasn't the decision come a wee-bit too late? "We came to this conclusion on the basis of a report submitted to us by an expert Dr Mahale," added Singh.
Joaquim at sea?
Surprisingly, Urban Development Minister Joaquim Alemao stated that he is not aware of the change in the plans. "I am not aware of this development", he said.
Even the officials at GSUDA are surprised with the sudden government decision.
"The High Court had asked CCP to cap and close the solid waste accumulated at the site. On CCP's request, the state government entrusted the work to GSUDA. But when we were about to issue a work order to cap the site, government asked us not to go ahead with the capping", informed Daulat Hawaldar, Member Secretary, GSUDA.
In the past, with the CCP failing to take the "Cradle to Grave" precautions of solid waste, the Curca garbage site had become prone to spontaneous local fire due to combustible part that also generated odour due to organic part and created water pollution due to run-off from rains, causing problems for people in the downstream and down gradient habitations in Curca.
Forced by circumstances and an indifferent state government, the Curca-Bambolim-Telaulim panchayat approached the High Court praying that the CCP be directed to remove and dispose the accumulated garbage (approximately 1.75 lakh metric tonnes) in a time-bound manner. This move forced the government to get its act together and they recommended capping and closing of the site.
But now with the government coming up with another plan, it may just be another long wait for the Curca residents!
How the capping was planned
According to the plan, garbage was to be leveled into a rectangular patch and compacted before a 45 cm thick layer of granular soil and another 60 cm thick layer of clay was placed on it. Then it was planned to cap the area, spread over 14,820 square metres, with a 30 cm thick layer of vegetative soil, with grass planted for holding the soil in place and in an effort to curtail the seepage of rainwater into the ground. Further, to minimize the possibility of leachate penetrating the water table, two bore wells were planned to be drilled below the depth of 10 metres for the purpose of pumping out leachate and treating it through a physico-chemical process. It was also decided to keep a daily watch on contents and document quantity, if it was pumped to the collection tank of physico-chemical treatment.
Justice alas, but wee bit late!
School teacher dies but legal heir wins 13-year-old legal battle
by Preetu Nair
PANJIM: After a 13-year-old legal battle, a school teacher finally earns justice. But unfortunately, she cannot enjoy the fruits of her long legal struggle, for, she is no more.
Ratnamala Khanolkar's legal battle started in 1994 and ended in 2007 with a High Court verdict, which is partly in her favour. Though Khanolkar (now through her legal heir) sought a direction from the court that the government quantify the arrears payable to her from June 1992 till the date of her death on June 28, 2005, the High Court directed the government to ascertain the liability regarding the salary arrears payable to the deceased petitioner for the period expiring in May 1993 from June 1992.
Khanolkar was appointed as a teacher with effect from June 1992, but when the school reopened after the summer vacation in June 1993, she was not permitted to discharge her duties as a teacher in the school. She therefore approached the Administrative Tribunal for prohibiting her from discharging her duties in 1994.
The Administrative Tribunal held that the termination of her services is bad in law and directed Shree Shantadurga Shiksha Samiti, Kavalem-Ponda chairperson and Director of Education to pay to Khanolkar, her salary from December 1992 in the prescribed scale after deducting salary @ the rate of 150/- per month.
But, the order passed by the Tribunal didn't disclose the period for which the amount of salary is to be calculated and paid to the petitioner.
Meanwhile, the respondents -- Shree Shantadurga Shiksha Samiti, Kavalem-Ponda chairperson and Director of Education -- maintained that Khanolkar had not rendered any service from June 1993 and the question of granting any salary for the period from June 1993 onwards does not arise.
However, the petitioner contended that since she was appointed in 1992, she became permanent employee since June 1994. When the matter came up before the Division bench of Justice RMS Khandeparkar and Justice R S Mohite, they observed that the record placed before them nowhere discloses that the deceased petitioner was selected after following regular procedure for selection in accordance with the provisions of law nor it discloses any letter of appointment having been issued to the petitioner disclosing that she was appointed on permanent basis.
The court also observed that once the employee is appointed as teacher in any private school in Goa it is well settled law that unless there is specific provision in the letter of appointment or statutory provision regarding deemed permanency on completion of the period of 2 years of employment, the employee cannot claim to have become permanent employee.
Dismissing the petitioner's plea to pay the salary from June 1992 till her death on June 28, 2005, the court noted that the question of directing the respondents to make the calculation about the salary after June 1993 does not arise, even as they admitted that the petitioner had rendered services up to May 1993 and so must be paid a salary till then.
by Preetu Nair
PANJIM: After a 13-year-old legal battle, a school teacher finally earns justice. But unfortunately, she cannot enjoy the fruits of her long legal struggle, for, she is no more.
Ratnamala Khanolkar's legal battle started in 1994 and ended in 2007 with a High Court verdict, which is partly in her favour. Though Khanolkar (now through her legal heir) sought a direction from the court that the government quantify the arrears payable to her from June 1992 till the date of her death on June 28, 2005, the High Court directed the government to ascertain the liability regarding the salary arrears payable to the deceased petitioner for the period expiring in May 1993 from June 1992.
Khanolkar was appointed as a teacher with effect from June 1992, but when the school reopened after the summer vacation in June 1993, she was not permitted to discharge her duties as a teacher in the school. She therefore approached the Administrative Tribunal for prohibiting her from discharging her duties in 1994.
The Administrative Tribunal held that the termination of her services is bad in law and directed Shree Shantadurga Shiksha Samiti, Kavalem-Ponda chairperson and Director of Education to pay to Khanolkar, her salary from December 1992 in the prescribed scale after deducting salary @ the rate of 150/- per month.
But, the order passed by the Tribunal didn't disclose the period for which the amount of salary is to be calculated and paid to the petitioner.
Meanwhile, the respondents -- Shree Shantadurga Shiksha Samiti, Kavalem-Ponda chairperson and Director of Education -- maintained that Khanolkar had not rendered any service from June 1993 and the question of granting any salary for the period from June 1993 onwards does not arise.
However, the petitioner contended that since she was appointed in 1992, she became permanent employee since June 1994. When the matter came up before the Division bench of Justice RMS Khandeparkar and Justice R S Mohite, they observed that the record placed before them nowhere discloses that the deceased petitioner was selected after following regular procedure for selection in accordance with the provisions of law nor it discloses any letter of appointment having been issued to the petitioner disclosing that she was appointed on permanent basis.
The court also observed that once the employee is appointed as teacher in any private school in Goa it is well settled law that unless there is specific provision in the letter of appointment or statutory provision regarding deemed permanency on completion of the period of 2 years of employment, the employee cannot claim to have become permanent employee.
Dismissing the petitioner's plea to pay the salary from June 1992 till her death on June 28, 2005, the court noted that the question of directing the respondents to make the calculation about the salary after June 1993 does not arise, even as they admitted that the petitioner had rendered services up to May 1993 and so must be paid a salary till then.
Suicides in Goa
PANJIM: Stress and family woes have not only sapped some people's will to live, but has led to suicide in a moment of weakness. An annual tabulation of data available from the Goa police reveals that the incidents of suicides amongst divorcees and those having family problems have witnessed a dramatic increase in the last 5 years.
This year, in just 6 months, 27 persons have committed suicide due to family problems. In 2006, 45 persons had committed suicide, which was an increase of 15 cases of suicide due to family problems. With the incidents of divorce on the raise, the number of suicide deaths due to divorce, which till 2005 was an unheard of, is on rise. In 2006, there were 3 divorce related suicide, which shot up to 5, within 6 months this year. Even failure in love, has led to suicide, though the number has declines to 8 this year, as compared to 24 in 2004.
These findings again underscore the need to have timely and effective family counseling programs for estranged couples. "The family counselors are there, but the culture of counseling, wherein a persons open up their feeing before the counselor is not there. There has to be more counseling centers with qualified marriage counselors to help an estranged couple," said Auda Veigas of Bailancho Ekvott.
But insanity, mental illness and depression due to other prolonged illness, still remains a single major cause for suicides in the state. While 27 committed suicides due to the above reasons from January to July 2007, the number was much higher in 2006 at 73. If unemployment has also led to suicide, what with 6 committing suicide this year, then bankruptcy or sudden change in economic status has forced people to take the "ultimate" step-suicide. In 2007, 5 committed suicide due to bankruptcy.
Experts believe that in an individualistic "winners take it all society", the losers are more likely to kill, if they don't have the will and strength to cope up with their woes, as it creates a sense helplessness and hopelessness. "Poor coping skills leads to an inability to deal with the problem and then they land in a situation of frustration and become desperate," opined Dr Rajesh Dhume, Senior Psychiatrist of the DHS, Asilo Hospital.
But he made it clear that there can't be reason for every suicide, as a person may commit suicide during their never had it so good days. "Many suicides are impulsive and they have no history of depression or mental illness," he added.
DIG Ujjwal Mishra candidly admitted that there is very little they can stop suicides. However, he admits that the Goa police is working to ensure that a person in distress gets counseling on time. "We thinking of strengthening 100 and also providing a toll-free number that is manned by a counselor, who can counsel anyone who calls for help," added Mishra.
(An earlier version of the article published in Gomantak Times, Panaji, Goa)
This year, in just 6 months, 27 persons have committed suicide due to family problems. In 2006, 45 persons had committed suicide, which was an increase of 15 cases of suicide due to family problems. With the incidents of divorce on the raise, the number of suicide deaths due to divorce, which till 2005 was an unheard of, is on rise. In 2006, there were 3 divorce related suicide, which shot up to 5, within 6 months this year. Even failure in love, has led to suicide, though the number has declines to 8 this year, as compared to 24 in 2004.
These findings again underscore the need to have timely and effective family counseling programs for estranged couples. "The family counselors are there, but the culture of counseling, wherein a persons open up their feeing before the counselor is not there. There has to be more counseling centers with qualified marriage counselors to help an estranged couple," said Auda Veigas of Bailancho Ekvott.
But insanity, mental illness and depression due to other prolonged illness, still remains a single major cause for suicides in the state. While 27 committed suicides due to the above reasons from January to July 2007, the number was much higher in 2006 at 73. If unemployment has also led to suicide, what with 6 committing suicide this year, then bankruptcy or sudden change in economic status has forced people to take the "ultimate" step-suicide. In 2007, 5 committed suicide due to bankruptcy.
Experts believe that in an individualistic "winners take it all society", the losers are more likely to kill, if they don't have the will and strength to cope up with their woes, as it creates a sense helplessness and hopelessness. "Poor coping skills leads to an inability to deal with the problem and then they land in a situation of frustration and become desperate," opined Dr Rajesh Dhume, Senior Psychiatrist of the DHS, Asilo Hospital.
But he made it clear that there can't be reason for every suicide, as a person may commit suicide during their never had it so good days. "Many suicides are impulsive and they have no history of depression or mental illness," he added.
DIG Ujjwal Mishra candidly admitted that there is very little they can stop suicides. However, he admits that the Goa police is working to ensure that a person in distress gets counseling on time. "We thinking of strengthening 100 and also providing a toll-free number that is manned by a counselor, who can counsel anyone who calls for help," added Mishra.
(An earlier version of the article published in Gomantak Times, Panaji, Goa)
Saturday, November 17, 2007
NGO spits fire at Goa State Aids Control Society
NGO spits fire at Goa State Aids Control Society
By Preetu Nair
PANJIM: An NGO, working with people living with HIV/AIDS, has alleged that people living with HIV/ AIDS are feeling discriminated, as very little budget is provided to the drop-in-coping centres (DIC) for people living with HIV/AIDS, even as the money is being wasted in printing “unnecessary” materials.
Demanding the removal of the present Project Director and two Deputy Directors of Goa State AIDS Control Society (GSACS), accusing them of corruption, the NGO -- Positive Lives Foundation (PLF- Goa) — in a press conference stated that they would submit their charter of demands to the government soon. “If the government fails to take action within a month, then we would sit on an indefinite hunger strike,” threatened Jaffer Inamdar, Program Manager, PLF.
Incidentally, things went sour between GSACS and PLF, when PLF was allotted only Rs 5 lakh for the year 2007-08, to run their DIC, a centre where people living with HIV/AIDS gets together. A fact not denied by Inamdar. “We need to receive more funds to help people living with HIV/AIDS, who have greater needs. They need to have access to medicines, nutritional food, educational material to understand HIV/AIDS better, economic and moral support as they are fighting a life threatening illness,” said Inamdar.
Besides, they have demanded that the state government should make allocation of funds for a new CD4 count machine at South Goa, issue a discount "Traveling Identity Cards" to all individual without disclosing their identities, ensure free of cost medicines for management of opportunistic infections (OI) to avail at all talukas and ensure women's empowerment program and nutritional and supplement for HIV positive women and children.
Squarely blaming GSACS for its lack of commitment towards people living with HIV/AIDS, Inamdar alleged that there is only Anti-Retroviral Therapy (ART) centre at Goa Medical College which doesn’t have adequate sitting arrangement or drinking water facility. “Doctors in the OPD’s at GMC are rude with a positive person and don’t treat them properly,” added Inamdar.
FUNDS allocated as per NACO norms:Dr Kaur
Speaking to GT, an apparently shocked Dr Dilraj Kaur, Director, GSACS refuted all charges made by PLF. She stated, “We are doing whatever is possible for people living with HIV/AIDS. We have to spend money as per National AIDS Control Organization’s (NACO) guidelines. Funds to be allocated component wise, either to NGOs or to DIC, are first allocated by NACO and re-appropriation between components is not permissible as per NACO guidelines”.
She stated that whatever funds have been allocated have been strictly in adherence to the guidelines and instructions issued by NACO. “At the highest level, the policy makers have allocated more funds for prevention of new HIV infections and spread of awareness (that is through IEC related activities). The allocation of funds for care, support and treatment are calculated based on the number of people infected with HIV and living with AIDS and accordingly the figures are disbursed to GSACS for further allocation of funds to the DIC. It is understandable that since the number of people not infected with HIV is much more than those infected, it is logical that the prevention effort and funds put in to ensure that new infections are prevented, would definitely be much more.”
Making it clear that she understands the problems of people living with HIV/AIDS, Dr Kaur said that she was the only Project Director to visit the DIC programme run by PLF and interact with HIV positive persons. “We have always taken up the issue of HIV positive persons and worked to find a solution to their woes,” added Dr Kaur.
Sources at GSACS reveal that as per the annual action plan approved by NACO for the year 2007-08, Goa would get Rs 569.91 lakhs. Of this, Rs 315.09 lakhs would be spent to prevent new infection and only Rs 10.66 lakhs would be spend on care, support and treatment. NACO has allotted Rs 10.66 lakhs to run the DIC, which is a sub-component of care, support and treatment.
“With two NGO’s running DIC in Goa , the money is equally divided between them. The above figure is a ceiling beyond which expenditure shouldn’t be incurred on any activity,” revealed a source at GSACS. Further, there is no allocation of fund for more ART centres or purchase of CD4 or CD8 machines.
Sources further reveal that the Project Director has already taken up the matter of CD 4 count machine with the Health Minister and a file has already been put up for procurement of machine from the state government funds.
(This article appeared in Gomantak Times,Panaji edition, Saturday, November 17,2007)
By Preetu Nair
PANJIM: An NGO, working with people living with HIV/AIDS, has alleged that people living with HIV/ AIDS are feeling discriminated, as very little budget is provided to the drop-in-coping centres (DIC) for people living with HIV/AIDS, even as the money is being wasted in printing “unnecessary” materials.
Demanding the removal of the present Project Director and two Deputy Directors of Goa State AIDS Control Society (GSACS), accusing them of corruption, the NGO -- Positive Lives Foundation (PLF- Goa) — in a press conference stated that they would submit their charter of demands to the government soon. “If the government fails to take action within a month, then we would sit on an indefinite hunger strike,” threatened Jaffer Inamdar, Program Manager, PLF.
Incidentally, things went sour between GSACS and PLF, when PLF was allotted only Rs 5 lakh for the year 2007-08, to run their DIC, a centre where people living with HIV/AIDS gets together. A fact not denied by Inamdar. “We need to receive more funds to help people living with HIV/AIDS, who have greater needs. They need to have access to medicines, nutritional food, educational material to understand HIV/AIDS better, economic and moral support as they are fighting a life threatening illness,” said Inamdar.
Besides, they have demanded that the state government should make allocation of funds for a new CD4 count machine at South Goa, issue a discount "Traveling Identity Cards" to all individual without disclosing their identities, ensure free of cost medicines for management of opportunistic infections (OI) to avail at all talukas and ensure women's empowerment program and nutritional and supplement for HIV positive women and children.
Squarely blaming GSACS for its lack of commitment towards people living with HIV/AIDS, Inamdar alleged that there is only Anti-Retroviral Therapy (ART) centre at Goa Medical College which doesn’t have adequate sitting arrangement or drinking water facility. “Doctors in the OPD’s at GMC are rude with a positive person and don’t treat them properly,” added Inamdar.
FUNDS allocated as per NACO norms:Dr Kaur
Speaking to GT, an apparently shocked Dr Dilraj Kaur, Director, GSACS refuted all charges made by PLF. She stated, “We are doing whatever is possible for people living with HIV/AIDS. We have to spend money as per National AIDS Control Organization’s (NACO) guidelines. Funds to be allocated component wise, either to NGOs or to DIC, are first allocated by NACO and re-appropriation between components is not permissible as per NACO guidelines”.
She stated that whatever funds have been allocated have been strictly in adherence to the guidelines and instructions issued by NACO. “At the highest level, the policy makers have allocated more funds for prevention of new HIV infections and spread of awareness (that is through IEC related activities). The allocation of funds for care, support and treatment are calculated based on the number of people infected with HIV and living with AIDS and accordingly the figures are disbursed to GSACS for further allocation of funds to the DIC. It is understandable that since the number of people not infected with HIV is much more than those infected, it is logical that the prevention effort and funds put in to ensure that new infections are prevented, would definitely be much more.”
Making it clear that she understands the problems of people living with HIV/AIDS, Dr Kaur said that she was the only Project Director to visit the DIC programme run by PLF and interact with HIV positive persons. “We have always taken up the issue of HIV positive persons and worked to find a solution to their woes,” added Dr Kaur.
Sources at GSACS reveal that as per the annual action plan approved by NACO for the year 2007-08, Goa would get Rs 569.91 lakhs. Of this, Rs 315.09 lakhs would be spent to prevent new infection and only Rs 10.66 lakhs would be spend on care, support and treatment. NACO has allotted Rs 10.66 lakhs to run the DIC, which is a sub-component of care, support and treatment.
“With two NGO’s running DIC in Goa , the money is equally divided between them. The above figure is a ceiling beyond which expenditure shouldn’t be incurred on any activity,” revealed a source at GSACS. Further, there is no allocation of fund for more ART centres or purchase of CD4 or CD8 machines.
Sources further reveal that the Project Director has already taken up the matter of CD 4 count machine with the Health Minister and a file has already been put up for procurement of machine from the state government funds.
(This article appeared in Gomantak Times,Panaji edition, Saturday, November 17,2007)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
