National Green Tribunal
Mr. Devidas Kalangutkar vs The Member Secretary, Goa Coastal Zone ... on 20 May, 2021
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Item No. 02 (Pune Bench)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
(By Video Conferencing)
Appeal No. 75/2018 (WZ)
(M.A. No. 162/2018) & (M.A. No. 163/2018)
Devidas Kalangutkar Appellant
Versus
Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority & Anr. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 20.05.2021
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYANAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. NAGIN NANDA, EXPERT MEMBER
ORDER
1. This appeal has been preferred against order dated 23.02.2018 passed by the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) as follows:
"NOW THEREFORE, the GCZMA in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (Central Act 29 of '1986) read with sub-rule (3) (a) of Rule 4 of the Environment (Protection) Rules 1986, and read with power vested with the GCZMA vide Order S.O. 3324 (E) dated 26/10/2016 issued by the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India, the GCZMA hereby directs Mr. Devitias Kalangutkar to demolish the concrete structure and compound wall in village Nerul, Bardez (as identified in inspection report and DSLR plan dated 6/10/2017 Enclosed hereto) as decided by the Authority in its 159th meeting held on 10//10/2017 within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the Dy. Collector & S.D.O, Bardez, Mapusa Goa to verify if the said concrete structure and compound wall is demolished, in an event it is not done as per these directives, then the concerned Deputy Collector S.D.O to demolish the concrete structure and compound wall thereafter within a time period of two weeks and recover 'the expenses incurred from Mr. Devidas Kalangutkar as the arrears of land revenue. Further, you are required to submit a compliance report in respect of compliance of afore stated directions to the GCZMA within next 3 days of expiry of the aforementioned 15 days' time period."1
2. This appeal was filed on 29.10.2018 but was never got listed. It has been listed for the first time today. None appears for the appellant. We have perused the record and proceed to deal with the matter on merits.
3. We find from the impugned order that on receiving a complaint dated 15.02.2016 about constructions in violation of CRZ Notification, show cause notice was issued to the appellant. The Bombay High Court at Goa passed order dated 22.12.2016 in Writ Petition No. 1158/2016, requiring the GCZMA to take a decision in the matter.
4. The appellant took the stand that the structure in question was in existence prior to 1991. The stand of the appellant and the documents relied upon were discussed as follows:
"AND WHEREAS, the matter was placed for personal hearing in the 151' GCZMA meeting held on 15/06/2017, wherein the respondent violator remained present along with his advocate. In the said meeting the Authority perused the site inspection reports prepared by the Expert Members of the GCZMA so also upon perusal of the photographs noted that, all the structures belonging to the Respondents are newly constructed i.e. after coming in to force of the CRZ Notification, 1991 / 2011. After detailed discussion and due deliberation and on considering the written as well as the oral submissions made by the parties and in view of the above decided to carry out mapping of the structures through the DSLR for verification of the newly constructed structures and thereafter to demolish all the newly constructed structures. In respect of the G+1 structure on the river bank it was decided to request the Sub Divisional Magistrate to conduct inquiry in order to identify the owner of the structure so as to issue appropriate notice for personal hearing.
AND WHEREAS, accordingly in terms of decision taken by authority in its 151st GCZMA. meeting held on 15/06/2017 the authority issued letters dated 07/08/2017 to the Superintendent of Survey and land records and Deputy Collector and S.D.O of Bardez, Mapusa for conduct of mapping of structures and necessary inquiry respectively.2
AND WHEREAS, the matter was placed in the 158th GCZMA meeting held on 26/09/2017, wherein The Authority noted that the DSLR Department has not submitted the report alongwith the plan with respect to the survey / mapping carried out by their Office and as such the Authority decided to defer the matter and take up the same in the next meeting i.e. on 10/10/2017.
AND WHEREAS, the matter was placed for decision in the 159th GCZMA meeting held on 10/10/2017 wherein the Authority after detailed discussion and verifying structures through the DSLR plan and on based on site inspection report decided to demolish concrete structure and compound wall."
5. It is thus clear that the plea of existence of constructions prior to 1991 has not been established. The constructions are post-1991. The impugned order is based on sound logic and relevant material including mapping of structures through DSLR.
6. In view of above, we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order.
Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed. In view of order passed in the main appeal, all pending MAs will stand disposed of.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP Sudhir Agarwal, JM M. Sathyanarayanan, JM Brijesh Sethi, JM Dr. Nagin Nanda, EM May 20, 2021 Appeal No. 75/2018 (WZ) M.A. Nos. 162/2018 & 163/2018 DV 3