PANJIM: There is good news for the resident of Chicalim and Vasco. The problem of congestion on the streets of Chicalim and Vasco due to heavy port traffic movements maybe over by 2009, what with the High Court ensuring that the National Highway –17B project is no more delayed.
With the advocate general Subodh Kantak appearing on behalf of the state government accepting the Border Roads Organization (BRO) report, it won't be long before the highway becomes a reality. Already the High Court of Bombay at Goa has asked the concerned parties to strictly maintain a time schedule. The Court has also made it clear that having regard to the importance of the project no application for extension of time will be made to the Court.
BRO was approached by MPT to carry out the feasibility study of four-lane highway for a stretch of 2.30 kms to be constructed between Tariwada and Sada junction in Phase-IV of NH 17-B as per the High Court order, in its report stated that it is feasible for construction and a loaded truck would be able to negotiate the road if constructed as per recommended design and specifications.
While the state government would complete all the necessary work -- the removal of encroachments and the relocation of public utilities -- on Phase I, Phase II and Phase III of the project, and hand over the land on which NH-17-B is to be constructed to the National Highway Authority by April 2008. Upon receiving possession of the land, free from all encumbrances the work of completing the road on Phase I, Phase II and Phase III would be completed within a period of 18 months. Further, the government has to had over the land for Phase IV after completing all necessary work within four months (by August 2008), after the work on Phase I, II and III is finished as per the orders of the Division bench led by Justice D B Bhosale.
Construction of NH 17B from Verna junction to Varunapuri (13.10 kms) was completed in May 2004. The construction of road from Varunapuri to Sada junction ( 5.2 km) was to be constructed in four phases. Phase I of 1.1 km would be constructed from Varunapuri to Gandhinagar, phase II of 1 km would be constructed from Gandhinagar to Baina, phase III of 0.8 km would be constructed from Baina –Tariwada and phase IV would be constructed at a stretch of 2.3 km from Tariwada to Sada junction. Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) has already deposited an amount of Rs 4.55 crores for resettlement and rehabilitation of the affected people with the Goa government in 2001.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Hill cutting in Siolim Goa
PANJIM: Observing that prima facie it appears that hill cutting has been going on in a property in Siolim, which may lead to landslide and cause further hindrance to human life, the High Court appointed North Goa Collect to personally visit the site and verify.
The Division bench of Justice D B Bhosale and Justice NA Britto while hearing a Public Interest Litigation complaining about illegal excavation / cutting of hill from the property surveyed under survey no. 189/2 situated at Bamanwada, Siolim , by Goraknath Atmaram Fulari and Shaku Braganza, both partners in BF Builders, which resulted in land slide, observed that the photographs reveal that hill cutting has been going on in the said property.
The letter was written to the High Court on August 21, 2007, by one Satish Banaulikar, resident of Oxel, Siolim, about the alleged illegalities, which was converted into a PIL, with the Court observing that the petitioner has raised an issue of environmental degradation. The petitioner had alleged that the construction had started after illegal excavation/ cutting of portion of hill/ soil, which is geographically, bounded below the property in survey no 190/0 and the illegal work of excavation/ cutting of hill is without any permission from the authorities.
It was also alleged that the duo were selling constructed bungalows in survey no 189/2 by cutting hills to foreigners and also brought to the notice of the authorities that if illegal excavation continues, it will result in soil erosion/ land sliding and effect or damage his property in survey no 190/0 and further severely affect cashew plantation activated by him which is his sole source of livelihood.
Court has asked North Goa Collector to find out whether the there has been any hill cutting and if the retaining wall constructed by the builder is enough to avoid further landslide. The Court has ordered that status quo should be maintained and also appointed Norma Alvares as Amicus curiae.
The Director of Panchayats in his report on the status of the construction activities in the property submitted to the Court stated that presently no excavation or hill cutting is noticed, however it is observed that in the said property towards the Northern side, along the width of the property, a landslide has occurred which is about 78 m in length and a retaining wall has been constructed towards the end of this landslide apparently to arrest further damage.
The Division bench of Justice D B Bhosale and Justice NA Britto while hearing a Public Interest Litigation complaining about illegal excavation / cutting of hill from the property surveyed under survey no. 189/2 situated at Bamanwada, Siolim , by Goraknath Atmaram Fulari and Shaku Braganza, both partners in BF Builders, which resulted in land slide, observed that the photographs reveal that hill cutting has been going on in the said property.
The letter was written to the High Court on August 21, 2007, by one Satish Banaulikar, resident of Oxel, Siolim, about the alleged illegalities, which was converted into a PIL, with the Court observing that the petitioner has raised an issue of environmental degradation. The petitioner had alleged that the construction had started after illegal excavation/ cutting of portion of hill/ soil, which is geographically, bounded below the property in survey no 190/0 and the illegal work of excavation/ cutting of hill is without any permission from the authorities.
It was also alleged that the duo were selling constructed bungalows in survey no 189/2 by cutting hills to foreigners and also brought to the notice of the authorities that if illegal excavation continues, it will result in soil erosion/ land sliding and effect or damage his property in survey no 190/0 and further severely affect cashew plantation activated by him which is his sole source of livelihood.
Court has asked North Goa Collector to find out whether the there has been any hill cutting and if the retaining wall constructed by the builder is enough to avoid further landslide. The Court has ordered that status quo should be maintained and also appointed Norma Alvares as Amicus curiae.
The Director of Panchayats in his report on the status of the construction activities in the property submitted to the Court stated that presently no excavation or hill cutting is noticed, however it is observed that in the said property towards the Northern side, along the width of the property, a landslide has occurred which is about 78 m in length and a retaining wall has been constructed towards the end of this landslide apparently to arrest further damage.
Can stone quarries and crushers be permitted to operate in the orchard zone?
PANJIM: Can stone quarries and crushers be permitted to operate in the orchard zone? Is change of land use from forest or agriculture to industrial permissible? Yes, states the Town and Country Planning department and Secretary (Mines).
TCP department, which had issued NOCs to operate four stone crushing units – M/s Balaji Stone in survey no. 59/1, M/s Rahimania Metal Industry in survey no. 75/1, M/s Madhav Rameshwar in survey no. 62/1 and Supernika Metal in survey no. 73/1 -- in the zone designated as orchard in the Regional Plan of Goa 2001 stated that these unit have been permitted based on the Regional Plan 2001 based on the uses permitted on Special Grounds in orchard Zone/ land uses.
Stating that these units have been permitted as ancillary to stone mining, considering the same to be of a temporary nature, Chief Town Planner Morad Ahmed in his affidavit before the High Court of Bombay at Goa stated that the Regional Plan proposal provided for broad based land use categories. As per uses permitted on special grounds, "any development commensurate with the need of area" can be permitted.
Interestingly, Secretary (Mines) Raajiv Yadhuvanshi who was directed by the Division bench to file an affidavit clarifying and making the State's stand clear in regard to whether change of use of land from forest and/or agriculture to industrial was permissible, accepted that the Director of Mines grants permission for quarrying leases in respect of minor minerals found in government and private lands.
However, he clarified that the license is granted after examining the topography of the area, local geological aspects and the location of the area for which license is sought. Further, before granting lease, various conditions are incorporated.
Some of these conditions include:
* Minerals should be extracted and removed in such a manner that no damage is done to any highways, roads, agricultural lands or trees or other places or public utility or public property
* Pay reasonable compensation to the owner or tenant or occupant of the land or property comprised in the leased area or in the vicinity of the leased area which is damaged or injured or disturbed as a result of quarrying operations or due to the flow or rejects
* Ensure that extraction of minor minerals will not affect the environment and ecology adversely
* Before the commencement of quarrying operation, prepare an environmental management plan to the satisfaction of the competent officer.
But this clear cut conditions were violated by the stone crusher operators as can be seen from the affidavit submitted by Bicholim SDM Arvind Bugde.
No wonder on October 29, 2007, the SDM issued directions to the owners of the stone crushing units to restore the affected nallah, Devachi Toli by removing the silt under the supervision of Canal Officer and remove large heaps of reject material in the form of fine white stone powder which is carelessly dumped near the stone crushing units thereby stopping the same to be flown in the fields and blown in the air.
Further, they have been directed to regulate their timing of operations to avoid sound pollution as well as submit the fresh Environment Impact Assessment Plan containing short-term and long-term precautionary measures to suppress noise, dust pollution to the satisfaction of Goa State Pollution Control Board.
TCP department, which had issued NOCs to operate four stone crushing units – M/s Balaji Stone in survey no. 59/1, M/s Rahimania Metal Industry in survey no. 75/1, M/s Madhav Rameshwar in survey no. 62/1 and Supernika Metal in survey no. 73/1 -- in the zone designated as orchard in the Regional Plan of Goa 2001 stated that these unit have been permitted based on the Regional Plan 2001 based on the uses permitted on Special Grounds in orchard Zone/ land uses.
Stating that these units have been permitted as ancillary to stone mining, considering the same to be of a temporary nature, Chief Town Planner Morad Ahmed in his affidavit before the High Court of Bombay at Goa stated that the Regional Plan proposal provided for broad based land use categories. As per uses permitted on special grounds, "any development commensurate with the need of area" can be permitted.
Interestingly, Secretary (Mines) Raajiv Yadhuvanshi who was directed by the Division bench to file an affidavit clarifying and making the State's stand clear in regard to whether change of use of land from forest and/or agriculture to industrial was permissible, accepted that the Director of Mines grants permission for quarrying leases in respect of minor minerals found in government and private lands.
However, he clarified that the license is granted after examining the topography of the area, local geological aspects and the location of the area for which license is sought. Further, before granting lease, various conditions are incorporated.
Some of these conditions include:
* Minerals should be extracted and removed in such a manner that no damage is done to any highways, roads, agricultural lands or trees or other places or public utility or public property
* Pay reasonable compensation to the owner or tenant or occupant of the land or property comprised in the leased area or in the vicinity of the leased area which is damaged or injured or disturbed as a result of quarrying operations or due to the flow or rejects
* Ensure that extraction of minor minerals will not affect the environment and ecology adversely
* Before the commencement of quarrying operation, prepare an environmental management plan to the satisfaction of the competent officer.
But this clear cut conditions were violated by the stone crusher operators as can be seen from the affidavit submitted by Bicholim SDM Arvind Bugde.
No wonder on October 29, 2007, the SDM issued directions to the owners of the stone crushing units to restore the affected nallah, Devachi Toli by removing the silt under the supervision of Canal Officer and remove large heaps of reject material in the form of fine white stone powder which is carelessly dumped near the stone crushing units thereby stopping the same to be flown in the fields and blown in the air.
Further, they have been directed to regulate their timing of operations to avoid sound pollution as well as submit the fresh Environment Impact Assessment Plan containing short-term and long-term precautionary measures to suppress noise, dust pollution to the satisfaction of Goa State Pollution Control Board.
Supreme Court has stayed the order regarding Congress MLA Mauvin Godinho
PANJIM: The Supreme Court has stayed the order of the High Court of Bombay at Goa which had ordered the accused Congress MLA Mauvin Godinho to appear before the Trial court on November 30, 2007.
Godinho had approached the Division bench of Justice Ashok Bhan and Justice DK Jain with a special leave petition for stay of the trial.
The High Court had found sufficient prima facie material against Godinho to frame charges against him for corruption and conspiracy in a multi-crore power rebate scam. While partly allowing the revision petition, the Court observed that charge shall be framed as under section 13 (1)(d)(i) and (iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with section 120 B of IPC and the accused tried in accordance with law.
A criminal revision application was filed in the High Court after the Sessions judge on December 8, 2006 ordered framing of charges against all the accused for offences punishable under section 120-B, 409, 420, 465,468, 471 of the IPC and section 13 (1)(d)(i) and section 13 (1)(d)(ii) read with 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Senior counsel KTS Tulsi and Shailendra Bhobe appeared for Godinho
Godinho had approached the Division bench of Justice Ashok Bhan and Justice DK Jain with a special leave petition for stay of the trial.
The High Court had found sufficient prima facie material against Godinho to frame charges against him for corruption and conspiracy in a multi-crore power rebate scam. While partly allowing the revision petition, the Court observed that charge shall be framed as under section 13 (1)(d)(i) and (iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with section 120 B of IPC and the accused tried in accordance with law.
A criminal revision application was filed in the High Court after the Sessions judge on December 8, 2006 ordered framing of charges against all the accused for offences punishable under section 120-B, 409, 420, 465,468, 471 of the IPC and section 13 (1)(d)(i) and section 13 (1)(d)(ii) read with 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Senior counsel KTS Tulsi and Shailendra Bhobe appeared for Godinho
Cuncolim Market
PANJIM: An expert appointed to examine whether the project of Market Complex cum Community hall in Cuncolim is feasible or not has submitted a report in favour of the project to the Court.
Jose F.F. de Albuquerque, Retired Chief Engineer, PWD was asked to look into the said area vis-a-vis flow and discharge of water and whether work planned and executed by the Goa State Urban Development Agency (GSUDA) is effective in the matter of discharge and flow of water by the High Court.
The expert inspected the site during this monsoon and submitted a report in favour of the project. However, the petitioner Jose Cruz Gomes and five others opposed the report stating that the expert didn't visit the site on the day it was raining. However, the Court rejected the argument, even as the petitioners were asked to make recommendations, if any.
In the past also, Advocate General Subodh Kantak had stated that they have a study, which shows that the construction of the market place will not cause inundation in the area. Then Amicus Curiae submitted that the study does not suit the purpose since it was not done in the monsoon.
According Amicus Curiae, the study is incomplete since it does not take into account the flow of water in the monsoon in the entire area namely Cuncolim market area and had demanded that the study must be done during the monsoon.
Jose F.F. de Albuquerque, Retired Chief Engineer, PWD was asked to look into the said area vis-a-vis flow and discharge of water and whether work planned and executed by the Goa State Urban Development Agency (GSUDA) is effective in the matter of discharge and flow of water by the High Court.
The expert inspected the site during this monsoon and submitted a report in favour of the project. However, the petitioner Jose Cruz Gomes and five others opposed the report stating that the expert didn't visit the site on the day it was raining. However, the Court rejected the argument, even as the petitioners were asked to make recommendations, if any.
In the past also, Advocate General Subodh Kantak had stated that they have a study, which shows that the construction of the market place will not cause inundation in the area. Then Amicus Curiae submitted that the study does not suit the purpose since it was not done in the monsoon.
According Amicus Curiae, the study is incomplete since it does not take into account the flow of water in the monsoon in the entire area namely Cuncolim market area and had demanded that the study must be done during the monsoon.
Curca garbage case
PANJIM: High Court has granted one-week's time to the state government to decide whether they should go ahead with the capping of Curca site or opt for another proposal to shift the garbage to another site before the following monsoon .
The Division bench granted a week's time on Advocate General Subodh Kantak's request.
It must be recalled that on September 25, 2006, in the minutes of order submitted to the Court, 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) – had 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.
Later, GSUDA postponed the work of capping Curca and said that it would be completed by March 31, 2008.
The Division bench granted a week's time on Advocate General Subodh Kantak's request.
It must be recalled that on September 25, 2006, in the minutes of order submitted to the Court, 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) – had 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.
Later, GSUDA postponed the work of capping Curca and said that it would be completed by March 31, 2008.
ANC case:AG seeks time
PANJIM: Advocate General Subodh Kantak has sought two weeks time to file a reply to the petition filed by a lady police sub-inspector, who was dismissed from service for demanding a bribe.
Terming her dismissal as a slur on her career and personal life, the former PSI Sandhya Gupta in her petition before the High Court of Bombay at Goa, challenged her dismissal from service by the Director General of Police. Gupta submitted that she was neither caught while accepting bribe nor any trap was laid to catch her nor was she is guilty of any misconduct, even while maintaining that she is innocent and there is a conspiracy behind lodging the complaint as well as registering it.
Gupta was dismissed from service based on a complaint by one Lajwanti Datwani, whose son Sunil was arrested and booked under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Actby Gupta after a raid on a rave party on September 23. At that time she was in charge of ANC police station as the regular incumbent had proceeded on three days leave.
Terming her dismissal as a slur on her career and personal life, the former PSI Sandhya Gupta in her petition before the High Court of Bombay at Goa, challenged her dismissal from service by the Director General of Police. Gupta submitted that she was neither caught while accepting bribe nor any trap was laid to catch her nor was she is guilty of any misconduct, even while maintaining that she is innocent and there is a conspiracy behind lodging the complaint as well as registering it.
Gupta was dismissed from service based on a complaint by one Lajwanti Datwani, whose son Sunil was arrested and booked under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Actby Gupta after a raid on a rave party on September 23. At that time she was in charge of ANC police station as the regular incumbent had proceeded on three days leave.
Aldeia de Goa:Files go missing
PANJIM: Calling the disappearance of the documents and files containing details of a construction project at Bambolim, too serious a matter "not to be taken note of" by the High Court, the Court has now asked the Curca- Bambolim village panchayat to file a complaint with the Agacaim police about the missing files.
Acting on the Court's oral instructions on Thursday, the Town and Country department had already lodged a complaint about the missing files and documents in the Panjim police station and issued show cause notice to the Khalasi (read sweeper) of Tiswadi taluka branch office.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto has asked the Police Inspector of Panjim and Agacaim to head the investigations into both the complaints. The PIs will have to submit their first report to the Court within 15 days.
With the panchayat stating that they have not received the files that were forwarded by them to the concerned government department and the TCP submitting that the file is lost/ missing, the Court has now asked the Technical Officer of PWD based in Panjim to deposit with the Registrar of the Court, the development/ construction plans of Goa Real Estate and Construction Ltd (GRECL, popularly known as Aldeia de Goa), by today.
The TCP submitted that the files were given to M/s SPRY Resources India Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad for scanning for record purposes and TCP department has written a letter to M/s SPRY Resources India Pvt Ltd, asking whether they have scanned the files. Responding to this, the Court instructed the Advocate General Subodh Kantak to inform the Court on the next date if the documents were scanned and computerized and to produce the same in the Court.
Further, taking note of the Curca-Bambolim panchayat and TCP department's statement that the files are missing, the Court observed that the two authorities are defeating the provision and objective of Right to Information Act, which is in its initial stage. The objective of RTI Act is to make public life more open and the administration more accountable to citizens by making available information whenever it is sought, the Court observed.
The Court has given time till November 29, 2007 to the state government to file their reply and the matter will be placed on board on November 30.
What does a government department do when a file goes missing and the Chief Secretary is summoned to the Court? The obvious reply is initiate action against the erring officers.
But when it is the TCP department, which is involved in the mystery of the missing files on the GRECL project, then expect the unexpected. Instead of taking the officers involved to task, the TCP Chief Town Planner Morad Ahmad by an office memorandum of November 22, has issued a show cause notice to the Khalasi (sweeper) of the TCP Tiswadi taluka office at Panjim. Show cause notice has been served to Mahadev Morajkar, seeking explanation and reasons for not performing his duties effectively and regarding the loss of the file.
Not impressed with this, the Court stated that though they don't want to comment on the show cause notice served to the Khalasi, they observed that the Khalasi can't act without the connivance of a senior officer and it is for the department to take proper action.
Acting on the Court's oral instructions on Thursday, the Town and Country department had already lodged a complaint about the missing files and documents in the Panjim police station and issued show cause notice to the Khalasi (read sweeper) of Tiswadi taluka branch office.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto has asked the Police Inspector of Panjim and Agacaim to head the investigations into both the complaints. The PIs will have to submit their first report to the Court within 15 days.
With the panchayat stating that they have not received the files that were forwarded by them to the concerned government department and the TCP submitting that the file is lost/ missing, the Court has now asked the Technical Officer of PWD based in Panjim to deposit with the Registrar of the Court, the development/ construction plans of Goa Real Estate and Construction Ltd (GRECL, popularly known as Aldeia de Goa), by today.
The TCP submitted that the files were given to M/s SPRY Resources India Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad for scanning for record purposes and TCP department has written a letter to M/s SPRY Resources India Pvt Ltd, asking whether they have scanned the files. Responding to this, the Court instructed the Advocate General Subodh Kantak to inform the Court on the next date if the documents were scanned and computerized and to produce the same in the Court.
Further, taking note of the Curca-Bambolim panchayat and TCP department's statement that the files are missing, the Court observed that the two authorities are defeating the provision and objective of Right to Information Act, which is in its initial stage. The objective of RTI Act is to make public life more open and the administration more accountable to citizens by making available information whenever it is sought, the Court observed.
The Court has given time till November 29, 2007 to the state government to file their reply and the matter will be placed on board on November 30.
What does a government department do when a file goes missing and the Chief Secretary is summoned to the Court? The obvious reply is initiate action against the erring officers.
But when it is the TCP department, which is involved in the mystery of the missing files on the GRECL project, then expect the unexpected. Instead of taking the officers involved to task, the TCP Chief Town Planner Morad Ahmad by an office memorandum of November 22, has issued a show cause notice to the Khalasi (sweeper) of the TCP Tiswadi taluka office at Panjim. Show cause notice has been served to Mahadev Morajkar, seeking explanation and reasons for not performing his duties effectively and regarding the loss of the file.
Not impressed with this, the Court stated that though they don't want to comment on the show cause notice served to the Khalasi, they observed that the Khalasi can't act without the connivance of a senior officer and it is for the department to take proper action.
Shacks in Goa
PANJIM: Can someone on the presumption that their "legal" temporary structure maybe demolished approach the High Court asking for relief?
The Petitioner, Cruz Cardozo, approached the Court depending on the information he received from Inacio Mariano Fernandes, who had erected a temporary shack, which was demolished that prior to the demolition of the shack, no notice of any nature was served on him, either asking him to show cause as to why the shack being erected by him should not be demolished or to stop the erection of the shack
Cardozo states that the Petitioner has a reasonable apprehension that a similar fate awaits him and his shack would be demolished in a similar fashion
However, the Court refused to entertain the petition and granted permission to the petitioner to withdraw the petition.
The petitioner, based on a notice inviting applications from the residents of Goa for the grant of permission for the tourist season 2007-08 for the installation of temporary shacks of size 14 x 7, in the South Goa Beaches, classified as "A" Stretches and "B" Stretches, had applied for a temporary shack.
The Petitioner states that "A" Stretch Beach amongst others included the beach at Cavelossim. The Petitioner accordingly applied for putting up a temporary shack at Cavelossim Beach under the name and style "Pearl's Beach Café" after paying the necessary fees on account of sale of the form.
The Petitioner furnished a refundable security deposit in terms of Clause 15 of the terms and conditions along with a letter on November 16, 2007. The Petitioner states that the Petitioner then commenced and finally completed the erection of the shack in all after the Petitioner was informed that he was allotted Shack No.1.
The Petitioner, Cruz Cardozo, approached the Court depending on the information he received from Inacio Mariano Fernandes, who had erected a temporary shack, which was demolished that prior to the demolition of the shack, no notice of any nature was served on him, either asking him to show cause as to why the shack being erected by him should not be demolished or to stop the erection of the shack
Cardozo states that the Petitioner has a reasonable apprehension that a similar fate awaits him and his shack would be demolished in a similar fashion
However, the Court refused to entertain the petition and granted permission to the petitioner to withdraw the petition.
The petitioner, based on a notice inviting applications from the residents of Goa for the grant of permission for the tourist season 2007-08 for the installation of temporary shacks of size 14 x 7, in the South Goa Beaches, classified as "A" Stretches and "B" Stretches, had applied for a temporary shack.
The Petitioner states that "A" Stretch Beach amongst others included the beach at Cavelossim. The Petitioner accordingly applied for putting up a temporary shack at Cavelossim Beach under the name and style "Pearl's Beach Café" after paying the necessary fees on account of sale of the form.
The Petitioner furnished a refundable security deposit in terms of Clause 15 of the terms and conditions along with a letter on November 16, 2007. The Petitioner states that the Petitioner then commenced and finally completed the erection of the shack in all after the Petitioner was informed that he was allotted Shack No.1.
Aldeia de Goa
ANJIM: In what could be termed as a major embarrassment to the government, the High Court has directed the Chief Secretary JP Singh to remain present in the Court today, if Town and Country Planning department fails to produce the file containing details of a construction project at Bambolim.
The Court has asked TCP department to produce the file containing Town and Country Planning approvals, plans and No Objection certificates in respect of the construction project coming up at the site of Goa Real Estate and Construction Ltd (GRECL, popularly known as Aldeia de Goa) today in the Court. Further, the Sarpanch and Secretary of Curca-Bambolim panchayat has to remain present in the Court today with all necessary documents.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto passed this order while hearing an affidavit by Patricia Pinto, General Secretary, People's Movement for Civic Action (PMCA), who is one of the petitioner in a petition against GRECL.
The counsel for the petitioner, Norma Alvares, submitted that the Pinto had applied on August 21, 2007 to the Assistant Public Information Officer of the TCP department under the Right to Information Act for inspection of the file containing TCP approvals, plans and No Objection certificates in respect of the construction project coming up at the site in Bambolim, which is the subject matter of a petition filed by PMCA and Goa Foundation against GRECL.
However, Pinto was denied access to the information by a letter dated September 18, 2004, (much after the statutory period under the RTI Act) and was informed that the file could not be traced.
Even the effort to get some crucial documents from the Secretary of village panchayat of Curca/ Bambolim under RTI Act didn't materialize. On October 16, 2007, under RTI the petitioner requested for crucial documents listed at I-v so that the file that was told to be not traceable since it was send to the Block Development Officer's office in 2003, could be traced. However, on November 14, 2007, she received a formal letter from the Panchayat stating that neither the memorandum for the BDO's office nor the Panchayat letter sending the file to the BDO's office can be traced.
Not impressed with these submissions the Court observed that it is not possible for the files pertaining to a particular project to disappear overnight and asked the concerned authorities to produce the files today.
The Court has asked TCP department to produce the file containing Town and Country Planning approvals, plans and No Objection certificates in respect of the construction project coming up at the site of Goa Real Estate and Construction Ltd (GRECL, popularly known as Aldeia de Goa) today in the Court. Further, the Sarpanch and Secretary of Curca-Bambolim panchayat has to remain present in the Court today with all necessary documents.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto passed this order while hearing an affidavit by Patricia Pinto, General Secretary, People's Movement for Civic Action (PMCA), who is one of the petitioner in a petition against GRECL.
The counsel for the petitioner, Norma Alvares, submitted that the Pinto had applied on August 21, 2007 to the Assistant Public Information Officer of the TCP department under the Right to Information Act for inspection of the file containing TCP approvals, plans and No Objection certificates in respect of the construction project coming up at the site in Bambolim, which is the subject matter of a petition filed by PMCA and Goa Foundation against GRECL.
However, Pinto was denied access to the information by a letter dated September 18, 2004, (much after the statutory period under the RTI Act) and was informed that the file could not be traced.
Even the effort to get some crucial documents from the Secretary of village panchayat of Curca/ Bambolim under RTI Act didn't materialize. On October 16, 2007, under RTI the petitioner requested for crucial documents listed at I-v so that the file that was told to be not traceable since it was send to the Block Development Officer's office in 2003, could be traced. However, on November 14, 2007, she received a formal letter from the Panchayat stating that neither the memorandum for the BDO's office nor the Panchayat letter sending the file to the BDO's office can be traced.
Not impressed with these submissions the Court observed that it is not possible for the files pertaining to a particular project to disappear overnight and asked the concerned authorities to produce the files today.
democracy can't work until the three arms of the Constitution- judiciary, legislature and executive-- work together in protecting democracy
PANJIM: Drawing the attention of those who are obliged to make laws to prevent illegalities, the High Court observed that with the administration not discharging its duties, it is the Court which is called upon by the citizens to direct the authorities to stop illegalities.
Making it clear that democracy can't work until the three arms of the Constitution- judiciary, legislature and executive-- work together in protecting democracy, the Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto observed that the Court can't substitute itself for the executives but can only express its unhappiness with such happenings.
The Division bench made these observations while disposing off a public interest litigation on illegal shacks on Calangute beach stated that though in this matter there has been compliance, the recurrence of illegal constructions and illegalities in the state is so rampant that it is high time that the executives takes steps to enact laws to prevent such illegal actions, either on public land or coastal belt.
The Court had converted a letter petition by Francisco Fernandes into a PIL. The petition addresses the issue of setting up illegal shacks hardly 50 mts away from water level. It also addresses the issue of non-performance of statutory duties on the part of certain authorities in allowing the same to be erected and/or allowing them to continue throughout the year, in violation of the permissions granted that they should be erected from October to mid-June every year. The petitioner also complained of environmental degradation of burning waste or garbage and/ or burning the same by shack owners.
Making it clear that democracy can't work until the three arms of the Constitution- judiciary, legislature and executive-- work together in protecting democracy, the Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto observed that the Court can't substitute itself for the executives but can only express its unhappiness with such happenings.
The Division bench made these observations while disposing off a public interest litigation on illegal shacks on Calangute beach stated that though in this matter there has been compliance, the recurrence of illegal constructions and illegalities in the state is so rampant that it is high time that the executives takes steps to enact laws to prevent such illegal actions, either on public land or coastal belt.
The Court had converted a letter petition by Francisco Fernandes into a PIL. The petition addresses the issue of setting up illegal shacks hardly 50 mts away from water level. It also addresses the issue of non-performance of statutory duties on the part of certain authorities in allowing the same to be erected and/or allowing them to continue throughout the year, in violation of the permissions granted that they should be erected from October to mid-June every year. The petitioner also complained of environmental degradation of burning waste or garbage and/ or burning the same by shack owners.
non-reservation of seats for OBCs from Goa
PANJIM: The High Court has issued notice to Goa State Commission for OBC, after including them as a respondent in a petition filed by four voters from the OBC community, about non-reservation of seats for OBCs from Goa in the Municipal Council elections to Ponda and Sanquelim
The four voters, two from Nabhik community and the other two from the Bhandari Naik community, registered on the rolls of the Ponda Municipal Council, had approached the High Court of Bombay at Goa. The matter will be heard again on Friday.
The petitioners submitted that in keeping with the constitutional objectives to give representation to the Backward communities in all governmental organizations, institutions and self-governing bodies such as Panchayats, Zilla Parishads and Municipalities, the state government introduced an amendment to Section 9 of the Goa Municipalities Act, 1968, thereby reserving seats for OBCs in the Municipal Councils in Goa.
According to them, in the two municipalities of Ponda and Sanquelim, large numbers of voters are from the OBC community, including the Nhabi and Bhandhari community. Relying on figures from the Goa State Commission for OBCs, they said that in Ponda Municipal Council there are about 15,032 voters, out of which about 41 % belong to the OBCs and in Sanquelim Municipal Council, there are about 9254 voters, out of which about 33% belong to the OBC.
The petitioners informed the Court that when they learnt that the respondents – State of Goa, through its Chief Secretary, Director of Municipal Administration and the Goa State Election Commission –have initiated the process to conduct elections for the Municipal Councils of Ponda and Sanquelim municipalities, some OBC persons approached Director of Municipal Administration and the Goa State Election Commission to find the number of seats reserved for the OBCs in the proposed elections to said Municipal Councils of Ponda and Sanquelim. It was learnt that no seats are reserved in these two Municipal Councils for the OBCs.
It was further submitted that the respondents are bent on holding the elections for the municipal councils of Ponda and Sanquelim without reserving seats for the other Backward Classes, therein in violation of and/or in contravention of the mandates contained in the said amended provisions of section 9 of the Municipalities Act, 1968.
The four voters, two from Nabhik community and the other two from the Bhandari Naik community, registered on the rolls of the Ponda Municipal Council, had approached the High Court of Bombay at Goa. The matter will be heard again on Friday.
The petitioners submitted that in keeping with the constitutional objectives to give representation to the Backward communities in all governmental organizations, institutions and self-governing bodies such as Panchayats, Zilla Parishads and Municipalities, the state government introduced an amendment to Section 9 of the Goa Municipalities Act, 1968, thereby reserving seats for OBCs in the Municipal Councils in Goa.
According to them, in the two municipalities of Ponda and Sanquelim, large numbers of voters are from the OBC community, including the Nhabi and Bhandhari community. Relying on figures from the Goa State Commission for OBCs, they said that in Ponda Municipal Council there are about 15,032 voters, out of which about 41 % belong to the OBCs and in Sanquelim Municipal Council, there are about 9254 voters, out of which about 33% belong to the OBC.
The petitioners informed the Court that when they learnt that the respondents – State of Goa, through its Chief Secretary, Director of Municipal Administration and the Goa State Election Commission –have initiated the process to conduct elections for the Municipal Councils of Ponda and Sanquelim municipalities, some OBC persons approached Director of Municipal Administration and the Goa State Election Commission to find the number of seats reserved for the OBCs in the proposed elections to said Municipal Councils of Ponda and Sanquelim. It was learnt that no seats are reserved in these two Municipal Councils for the OBCs.
It was further submitted that the respondents are bent on holding the elections for the municipal councils of Ponda and Sanquelim without reserving seats for the other Backward Classes, therein in violation of and/or in contravention of the mandates contained in the said amended provisions of section 9 of the Municipalities Act, 1968.
Petrol pump in Calangute
PANJIM: There is a ray of hope for the residents in the tourist belt of North Goa. Their demand for a petrol pump in the vicinity may soon become a reality if the Technical Officer, Public Works Department shows the green signal.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto has asked M/S Reira Petro Services Pvt. Ltd, which intends to start a petrol pump at Calangute to make a fresh application to Technical Officer, Assistant Engineer, Sub-Division III, PWD (III), Mapusa, for occupancy certificate. The Technical Officer has to decide the matter within 7 days, the Court added.
The Court passed this order after the counsel for the Technical Officer, SR Rivonkar informed the Court that Calangute panchayat, which had forwarded an application for occupancy certificate made by M/S Reira Petro Services Pvt. Ltd to the Technical Officer, had withdrawn it and therefore they have no application with them.
The residents of Calangute, Candolim, Anjuna, Arpora, Baga and Saligao have been demanding for a petrol pump in the vicinity since 2001. Finally, in 2004, Calangute panchayat passed a resolution to grant provisional permission in survey no. 119/9 in Gaura vaddo, Calangute in the property of the petitioner -- M/S Reira Petro Services Pvt. Ltd.
Soon after, the petitioner is appointed as the franchisee of Essar Oil Limited and obtains no objection certificates from Chief Town Planner, District Magistrate, SP (North), Calangute panchayat and even Chief Controller of Explosives, Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organization, Mumbai.
However, soon after the NOCs are obtained, the petitioner alleged that the Calangute MLA writes a letter to the Town and Country Planning minister in July 7, 2005 regarding the petrol pump. The next day, oral instructions are issued to stop work and later various state government and panchayat authorities, which had granted NOCs, keep the same in abeyance.
Giving into the repeated demands made by the people, the Chief Town Planner informs the District Magistrate on December 2006 that the government in public interest has decided to allow the project and the letter asking them to keep NOC in abeyance is withdrawn.
However, due to the delay, the petitioners lost out on the franchise of Essar and later managed to get franchise from BPCL. Though the pump is ready, the petitioner couldn't occupy the pump in the absence of an occupancy certificate from the Technical Officer and therefore approached the High Court.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto has asked M/S Reira Petro Services Pvt. Ltd, which intends to start a petrol pump at Calangute to make a fresh application to Technical Officer, Assistant Engineer, Sub-Division III, PWD (III), Mapusa, for occupancy certificate. The Technical Officer has to decide the matter within 7 days, the Court added.
The Court passed this order after the counsel for the Technical Officer, SR Rivonkar informed the Court that Calangute panchayat, which had forwarded an application for occupancy certificate made by M/S Reira Petro Services Pvt. Ltd to the Technical Officer, had withdrawn it and therefore they have no application with them.
The residents of Calangute, Candolim, Anjuna, Arpora, Baga and Saligao have been demanding for a petrol pump in the vicinity since 2001. Finally, in 2004, Calangute panchayat passed a resolution to grant provisional permission in survey no. 119/9 in Gaura vaddo, Calangute in the property of the petitioner -- M/S Reira Petro Services Pvt. Ltd.
Soon after, the petitioner is appointed as the franchisee of Essar Oil Limited and obtains no objection certificates from Chief Town Planner, District Magistrate, SP (North), Calangute panchayat and even Chief Controller of Explosives, Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organization, Mumbai.
However, soon after the NOCs are obtained, the petitioner alleged that the Calangute MLA writes a letter to the Town and Country Planning minister in July 7, 2005 regarding the petrol pump. The next day, oral instructions are issued to stop work and later various state government and panchayat authorities, which had granted NOCs, keep the same in abeyance.
Giving into the repeated demands made by the people, the Chief Town Planner informs the District Magistrate on December 2006 that the government in public interest has decided to allow the project and the letter asking them to keep NOC in abeyance is withdrawn.
However, due to the delay, the petitioners lost out on the franchise of Essar and later managed to get franchise from BPCL. Though the pump is ready, the petitioner couldn't occupy the pump in the absence of an occupancy certificate from the Technical Officer and therefore approached the High Court.
Amona Bachao Andolan and Panchkruti Nagrik Samiti
PANJIM: Even as the High Court admitted that people could protest so long as it is lawful, they made it clear that citizens can't take law in their own hands and obstruct vehicular movement.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto passed this order while disposing off a petition filed by truck owners Claudio Marquis and 12 others, whose truck filled with mineral ore of M/S Sesa Goa Ltd had been blocked by the agitating citizens belonging to Amona Bachao Andolan and Panchkruti Nagrik Samiti.
Villagers are agitating against the pollution caused due to mining activity and has also filed a complaint against the truck owners and others (read the mining companies) under section 133 of CrPC (removal of nuisance) with the Bicholim Deputy Collector. The Court has asked the Deputy Collector to consider the same.
However, Marquis and others approached the Court against the alleged "illegal" action of the two citizen's groups, which had blocked the Sonshi – Amona road from November 13, 2007. The State of Goa, North Goa Collector, Bicholim Deputy Collector, Mamlatdar and Director General of Police (DGP) were also made respondents for the alleged failure to take action against people blocking the road and stopping vehicular movement.
All the 114 trucks were transporting iron ore belonging to M/S Sesa Goa Ltd from Sonshi mines to Amona Bunder were blocked since November 13. The counsel for the petitioners, Atmaram Nadkarni alleged that despite writing to the various government authorities and meeting the Bicholim Deputy Collector and SDPO, they failed to take any action in the matter.
The Court not only directed the state government to give assistance to the petitioners to move the trucks from the place where they currently are, but made it clear that there should be no obstruction on the road and if there is any obstruction is there on the road, it should be removed. The Court issued this order after the counsel for the petitioner pointed out that tents were constructed on the road.
However, counsel for the government, SR Rivonkar, submitted that there are no constructions of the road. The counsel for the two citizen's groups, Vivek Rodrigues, also reiterated this statement.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto passed this order while disposing off a petition filed by truck owners Claudio Marquis and 12 others, whose truck filled with mineral ore of M/S Sesa Goa Ltd had been blocked by the agitating citizens belonging to Amona Bachao Andolan and Panchkruti Nagrik Samiti.
Villagers are agitating against the pollution caused due to mining activity and has also filed a complaint against the truck owners and others (read the mining companies) under section 133 of CrPC (removal of nuisance) with the Bicholim Deputy Collector. The Court has asked the Deputy Collector to consider the same.
However, Marquis and others approached the Court against the alleged "illegal" action of the two citizen's groups, which had blocked the Sonshi – Amona road from November 13, 2007. The State of Goa, North Goa Collector, Bicholim Deputy Collector, Mamlatdar and Director General of Police (DGP) were also made respondents for the alleged failure to take action against people blocking the road and stopping vehicular movement.
All the 114 trucks were transporting iron ore belonging to M/S Sesa Goa Ltd from Sonshi mines to Amona Bunder were blocked since November 13. The counsel for the petitioners, Atmaram Nadkarni alleged that despite writing to the various government authorities and meeting the Bicholim Deputy Collector and SDPO, they failed to take any action in the matter.
The Court not only directed the state government to give assistance to the petitioners to move the trucks from the place where they currently are, but made it clear that there should be no obstruction on the road and if there is any obstruction is there on the road, it should be removed. The Court issued this order after the counsel for the petitioner pointed out that tents were constructed on the road.
However, counsel for the government, SR Rivonkar, submitted that there are no constructions of the road. The counsel for the two citizen's groups, Vivek Rodrigues, also reiterated this statement.
Candolim panchayat to produce all documents and files regarding the alleged "illegal" constructions
PANJIM: The Court has asked Candolim panchayat to produce all documents and files regarding the alleged "illegal" constructions indulged in by Calangute MLA Agnelo Fernandes that were demanded by a commoner Betty Alvares under Right To Information Act today in the Court.
The Division bench Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto directed the panchayat to produce the documents and files after Candolim panchayat refused to give information to the petitioner Alvares, stating that she is a foreigner.
Advocate General Subodh Kantak orally told the Court that if a person has any grievance then they should come to the Court with all the documents rather than direct the Court to inquire into it.
However, the Court observed that a foreign national could ask for documents if any illegality is committed. The petitioner had written to the panchayat informing about illegalities indulged in by the MLA. The Court further made an oral observation that the Panchayat is only raising some technical objections and not looking into the CRZ violations.
It must be recalled that the petitioner has alleged that the MLA in connivance with Candolim panchayat and GCZMA had illegally regularized the illegal structures in violation of Coastal Zone Regulation, Town and Country Planning Act and Panchayat Act. Further, despite the constructions being illegal, no action was taken against Agnelo, she alleged.
The Court has asked Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) to file an affidavit after conducting the inspection and examining the licenses that have been obtained.
The Division bench Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto directed the panchayat to produce the documents and files after Candolim panchayat refused to give information to the petitioner Alvares, stating that she is a foreigner.
Advocate General Subodh Kantak orally told the Court that if a person has any grievance then they should come to the Court with all the documents rather than direct the Court to inquire into it.
However, the Court observed that a foreign national could ask for documents if any illegality is committed. The petitioner had written to the panchayat informing about illegalities indulged in by the MLA. The Court further made an oral observation that the Panchayat is only raising some technical objections and not looking into the CRZ violations.
It must be recalled that the petitioner has alleged that the MLA in connivance with Candolim panchayat and GCZMA had illegally regularized the illegal structures in violation of Coastal Zone Regulation, Town and Country Planning Act and Panchayat Act. Further, despite the constructions being illegal, no action was taken against Agnelo, she alleged.
The Court has asked Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) to file an affidavit after conducting the inspection and examining the licenses that have been obtained.
Garbage problem in Goa
PANJIM: With the municipal councils and corporation failing to comply with the order of High Court of Bombay at Goa, which directed them to commission the landfill sites in 14 municipal areas in a scientific manner and in accordance with Municipal Solid Waste Rules by October.
This was brought to the notice of the Court by Amicus curiae Norma Alvares, to which the Court observed that there appears to be a total failure on the part of the administration. With no solution to Goa's garbage woes, has asked the Advocate General Subodh Kantak to hold a meeting of the counsels of the various municipal corporation and councils.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto suggested this after considering varied positions of the councils and corporation, which revealed that except for Mapusa and Panjim, which has sent their proposal to the government, all other proposals were pending either on account of public opposition or opposition of panchayat or rejection of the permission from Goa State Pollution Control Board.
While the Chief Officer of Mormugao Municipal Council stated that they have already set up a waste treatment plant at Sada, Vasco for composting of municipal waste through microbial composting method, Chief Officer of Bicholim Municipal Council submitted that they have identified a landfill site at Bordem, Bicholim, where they intend to set up a composting plant and the government has initiated land acquisition proceedings in respect of the said land.
While Deputy Collector of Ponda stated that they have identified land at Keriyan, Khandepar village but waiting for construction license from Curti Khandepar panchayat, the Chief Officer of Mapusa Municipal Council said that they have selected a site at Cuchelim village, which has got all necessary permissions and now the North Goa Collector has started the land acquisition process. On the other hand, the Chief Officer of Cuncolim Municipal Council informed that the people of Ambaulim village, where the garbage treatment plant was to be set up, were opposing it and now the Council has identified a new site for treatment and disposal of solid waste in Cuncolim village.
Even the case of Panjim is no different. AG informed the Court that land acquisition at Bainguinim has been kept on hold due to people's opposition. Then the Court wanted to know from the counsel for Corporation of City of Panaji as to why they are trying to set up a landfill site in Bainguinim when the committee appointed by the Court did not suggest the site at Bainguinim.
The Court has asked the government to see immediate action is taken to set up garbage treatment plant and the emergency clause of Land Acquisition Act is made applicable for the same.
This was brought to the notice of the Court by Amicus curiae Norma Alvares, to which the Court observed that there appears to be a total failure on the part of the administration. With no solution to Goa's garbage woes, has asked the Advocate General Subodh Kantak to hold a meeting of the counsels of the various municipal corporation and councils.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto suggested this after considering varied positions of the councils and corporation, which revealed that except for Mapusa and Panjim, which has sent their proposal to the government, all other proposals were pending either on account of public opposition or opposition of panchayat or rejection of the permission from Goa State Pollution Control Board.
While the Chief Officer of Mormugao Municipal Council stated that they have already set up a waste treatment plant at Sada, Vasco for composting of municipal waste through microbial composting method, Chief Officer of Bicholim Municipal Council submitted that they have identified a landfill site at Bordem, Bicholim, where they intend to set up a composting plant and the government has initiated land acquisition proceedings in respect of the said land.
While Deputy Collector of Ponda stated that they have identified land at Keriyan, Khandepar village but waiting for construction license from Curti Khandepar panchayat, the Chief Officer of Mapusa Municipal Council said that they have selected a site at Cuchelim village, which has got all necessary permissions and now the North Goa Collector has started the land acquisition process. On the other hand, the Chief Officer of Cuncolim Municipal Council informed that the people of Ambaulim village, where the garbage treatment plant was to be set up, were opposing it and now the Council has identified a new site for treatment and disposal of solid waste in Cuncolim village.
Even the case of Panjim is no different. AG informed the Court that land acquisition at Bainguinim has been kept on hold due to people's opposition. Then the Court wanted to know from the counsel for Corporation of City of Panaji as to why they are trying to set up a landfill site in Bainguinim when the committee appointed by the Court did not suggest the site at Bainguinim.
The Court has asked the government to see immediate action is taken to set up garbage treatment plant and the emergency clause of Land Acquisition Act is made applicable for the same.
Illegal huts in Arambol: Matter in HC
PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa has converted a letter, complaining about illegal huts erected within High Tide Line (HTL) in Arambol, which is given on rent to foreigners during tourist season, into public interest litigation. The huts are erected every season since 2004, alleged the petitioner.
One John Fernandes had written a letter to the High Court on September 19, which was converted into a PIL on October 26. Ten illegal hutments were erected within 50 mts of HTL at Arambol beach, besides two illegal houses.
When the matter came up before the Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto they issued notice to Suresh Pai, Yashoda Pai of Khalcha wadda and Nitin Kudov of Girkar waddo from Arambol for illegally erecting the structures in no development zone (NDZ).
The petitioner, who appeared in person, alleged that Pai didn't obtain the construction license and the house number allotted by the village panchayat of Arambol is bogus and illegal. It was issued even as the application didn't comply with the house registration procedures, the petitioner stated.
He also stated that the illegal hutments were erected in October 2006 even though Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) had demolished it earlier. He further submitted that he had approached various authorities for justice but without any avail.
Further, the Court has asked GCZMA to carry out site inspections within 2 weeks.
One John Fernandes had written a letter to the High Court on September 19, which was converted into a PIL on October 26. Ten illegal hutments were erected within 50 mts of HTL at Arambol beach, besides two illegal houses.
When the matter came up before the Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto they issued notice to Suresh Pai, Yashoda Pai of Khalcha wadda and Nitin Kudov of Girkar waddo from Arambol for illegally erecting the structures in no development zone (NDZ).
The petitioner, who appeared in person, alleged that Pai didn't obtain the construction license and the house number allotted by the village panchayat of Arambol is bogus and illegal. It was issued even as the application didn't comply with the house registration procedures, the petitioner stated.
He also stated that the illegal hutments were erected in October 2006 even though Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) had demolished it earlier. He further submitted that he had approached various authorities for justice but without any avail.
Further, the Court has asked GCZMA to carry out site inspections within 2 weeks.
British National case in Goa i
PANJIM: A foreigner's attempt to get his money, which was confiscated by the Customs officials, released, through the High Court didn't materialize, as the Court refused to interfere in the matter.
Michael John Holyoake, a British national who had arrived on a tourist visa to Goa for a stay from October 21, 2007 to November 18, 2007 was arrested at Dabolim airport on October 21 by the Customs officials. They also confiscated 8000 UK pounds and Travelers cheques of 60,000 UK pounds under the Foreign Exchange Management Act.
Holyoake submitted to the Court that he was unaware of the legal provisions and procedures in India and was not aware that there are restrictions in carrying Travelers cheques and foreign currency in India. The Custom officials had also attached his passport. He further submitted that he was not aware of the procedure, which required him to declare in a prescribed form.
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mapusa on October 24, 2007, released the accused on bail and then he field an application in the High Court to direct the Commissioner of Customs, Panjim to release the money.
However, the High Court dismissed the writ petition.
Michael John Holyoake, a British national who had arrived on a tourist visa to Goa for a stay from October 21, 2007 to November 18, 2007 was arrested at Dabolim airport on October 21 by the Customs officials. They also confiscated 8000 UK pounds and Travelers cheques of 60,000 UK pounds under the Foreign Exchange Management Act.
Holyoake submitted to the Court that he was unaware of the legal provisions and procedures in India and was not aware that there are restrictions in carrying Travelers cheques and foreign currency in India. The Custom officials had also attached his passport. He further submitted that he was not aware of the procedure, which required him to declare in a prescribed form.
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mapusa on October 24, 2007, released the accused on bail and then he field an application in the High Court to direct the Commissioner of Customs, Panjim to release the money.
However, the High Court dismissed the writ petition.
non-reservation of seats for OBCs from Goa
PANJIM: Aggrieved by the non-reservation of seats for OBCs from Goa in the Municipal Council elections to Ponda and Sanquelim, four voters, two from Nabhik community and the other two from the Bhandari Naik community, registered on the rolls of the Ponda Municipal Council, approached the High Court of Bombay at Goa.
The petitioners submitted that in keeping with the constitutional objectives to give representation to the Backward communities in all governmental organizations, institutions and self-governing bodies such as Panchayats, Zilla Parishads and Municipalities, the state government introduced an amendment to Section 9 of the Goa Municipalities Act, 1968, thereby reserving seats for OBCs in the Municipal Councils in Goa.
According to them, in the two municipalities of Ponda and Sanquelim, large numbers of voters are from the OBC community, including the Nhabi and Bhandhari community. Relying on figures from the Goa State Commission for OBCs, they said that in Ponda Municipal Council there are about 15,032 voters, out of which about 41 % belong to the OBCs and in Sanquelim Municipal Council, there are about 9254 voters, out of which about 33% belong to the OBC.
The petitioners informed the Court that when they learnt that the respondents – State of Goa, through its Chief Secretary, Director of Municipal Administration and the Goa State Election Commission –have initiated the process to conduct elections for the Municipal Councils of Ponda and Sanquelim municipalities, some OBC persons approached Director of Municipal Administration and the Goa State Election Commission to find the number of seats reserved for the OBCs in the proposed elections to said Municipal Councils of Ponda and Sanquelim. It was learnt that no seats are reserved in these two Municipal Councils for the OBCs.
It was further submitted that the respondents are bent on holding the elections for the municipal councils of Ponda and Sanquelim without reserving seats for the other Backward Classes, therein in violation of and/or in contravention of the mandates contained in the said amended provisions of section 9 of the Municipalities Act, 1968.
The matter will be heard next week.
The petitioners submitted that in keeping with the constitutional objectives to give representation to the Backward communities in all governmental organizations, institutions and self-governing bodies such as Panchayats, Zilla Parishads and Municipalities, the state government introduced an amendment to Section 9 of the Goa Municipalities Act, 1968, thereby reserving seats for OBCs in the Municipal Councils in Goa.
According to them, in the two municipalities of Ponda and Sanquelim, large numbers of voters are from the OBC community, including the Nhabi and Bhandhari community. Relying on figures from the Goa State Commission for OBCs, they said that in Ponda Municipal Council there are about 15,032 voters, out of which about 41 % belong to the OBCs and in Sanquelim Municipal Council, there are about 9254 voters, out of which about 33% belong to the OBC.
The petitioners informed the Court that when they learnt that the respondents – State of Goa, through its Chief Secretary, Director of Municipal Administration and the Goa State Election Commission –have initiated the process to conduct elections for the Municipal Councils of Ponda and Sanquelim municipalities, some OBC persons approached Director of Municipal Administration and the Goa State Election Commission to find the number of seats reserved for the OBCs in the proposed elections to said Municipal Councils of Ponda and Sanquelim. It was learnt that no seats are reserved in these two Municipal Councils for the OBCs.
It was further submitted that the respondents are bent on holding the elections for the municipal councils of Ponda and Sanquelim without reserving seats for the other Backward Classes, therein in violation of and/or in contravention of the mandates contained in the said amended provisions of section 9 of the Municipalities Act, 1968.
The matter will be heard next week.
HC lifts ban
PANJIM: The High Court has lifted the ban imposed on the state government with regards to granting permissions for construction within 40-metres-set-back line along the National Highways.
The Court, by its earlier order had restrained the state government from granting any relaxation to the 40-metres-set-back line along the National Highways without due approval of the Central government, either by itself or through its agents. Besides, the state government was also restrained from granting "Occupancy Certificate" to the constructions already built within the 40- metres-NDZ of NH-17, until and unless such persons obtain the approval of the Central Government.
However, the Division bench of Justice RMS Khandeparkar and Justice RS Mohite observed that prima facie there is no case made out for grant of any interim relief and as such the petitioners -- Fawia Mesquita and Noel Sapeco—are not entitled for continuation of the interim relief granted on May 16, 2007 by the Court.
The Court came to this conclusion as the petitioners were not been able to point out any statutory provision, which could restrain the construction within a radius of 40 metres on either sides of the highways and the petitioners have merely placed reliance upon a circular issued on the basis of the recommendations by Indian Road Congress in support of the contention that no construction could be allowed within the said area of 40 metres from the center line of the highways.
The petitioners had raised the issue of illegal constructions being carried out within 40 metres set-back from the centre line of National Highway No.17 which according to the petitioners, besides choking the said National Highway, has been the cause of many accidents and at times fatal.
They also raised the issue of the Village Panchayat Building Rules, 1971, which are in force being diluted by issuance of Circular dated February 25, 2005, which according to the petitioners could not be issued in view of Section 19(2)(i) of the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 once a Village Panchayat is de-notified as a planning area.
The Court, by its earlier order had restrained the state government from granting any relaxation to the 40-metres-set-back line along the National Highways without due approval of the Central government, either by itself or through its agents. Besides, the state government was also restrained from granting "Occupancy Certificate" to the constructions already built within the 40- metres-NDZ of NH-17, until and unless such persons obtain the approval of the Central Government.
However, the Division bench of Justice RMS Khandeparkar and Justice RS Mohite observed that prima facie there is no case made out for grant of any interim relief and as such the petitioners -- Fawia Mesquita and Noel Sapeco—are not entitled for continuation of the interim relief granted on May 16, 2007 by the Court.
The Court came to this conclusion as the petitioners were not been able to point out any statutory provision, which could restrain the construction within a radius of 40 metres on either sides of the highways and the petitioners have merely placed reliance upon a circular issued on the basis of the recommendations by Indian Road Congress in support of the contention that no construction could be allowed within the said area of 40 metres from the center line of the highways.
The petitioners had raised the issue of illegal constructions being carried out within 40 metres set-back from the centre line of National Highway No.17 which according to the petitioners, besides choking the said National Highway, has been the cause of many accidents and at times fatal.
They also raised the issue of the Village Panchayat Building Rules, 1971, which are in force being diluted by issuance of Circular dated February 25, 2005, which according to the petitioners could not be issued in view of Section 19(2)(i) of the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 once a Village Panchayat is de-notified as a planning area.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
