National Green Tribunal
White Raj Resorts Private Ltd vs The Member Secretary, Goa Coastal Zone ... on 17 February, 2023
Item No. 4 (Pune Bench)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 12/2018(WZ)
White Raj Resorts Pvt. Ltd.
.....Applicant
Versus
GCZMA
....Respondent
Date of hearing: 17.02.2023
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant : Mr. S. Swaminathan, Advocate
Respondent : Ms. Ruchira Gupta, Advocate for R-GCZMA
ORDER
1. From the side of Applicant, learned Counsel Mr. S. Swaminathan has appeared.
2. This Original Application has been filed with the prayer that the Respondent/GCZMA be directed to comply the order dated 16.05.2017 passed by the GCZMA, by which demolition of all the illegal structures was ordered as well as order dated 02.03.2016 passed by this Tribunal in Original Application No. 131/2015 (White Raj Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Goa & Ors.), where-by this Tribunal had ordered that the GCZMA shall act upon the complaints made by the Applicant in respect of illegal construction raised on Survey No. 80/1 of Village Nagoreem Palolem, Canacona, South Goa, within two months.
3. The brief facts of this case are that 1) Dr. Shaba Rama Naik Gaonkar Alias Chandrakant Rama Naik Gaonkar, 2) Mr. Suraj Naik Page 1 of 5 Ballikar, 3) Mr. Vinod Vasant Naik, 4) Mr. Shantaji Rama Naik Gaonkar,
5) Mrs. Milagres Xavier Corte, 6) Mr. Sudhakar Shankar Pagi, 7) Mr. Ashok Shankar Pagi, 8) Mr. Bichim Paik Pagi and 9) Mr. Shivanand Anandu Pagi have constructed illegal structures totalling more than 400 in number in blatant violation of CRZ norms. The Applicant had approached this Tribunal by filing Original Application No. 131/2015, where-in order dated 02.03.2016 was passed to the following effect:-
" The present Application seeks demolition of the illegal construction raised on Survey No.80/1 of Village Nagoreem Palolem, Canacona, South Goa against which the Applicant has been making complaints since 26th October, 2013 to GCZMA. According to the Applicant, the entire survey number is within 200 mtrs. of HTL CRZ-III area and none of the constructions have any permission or authorisation for raising such constructions.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of GCZMA on instructions submits that they will act upon the complaints as made by the Applicant and pass orders in accordance with law within three (03) months.
Considering these submissions we dispose of this Application with following direction:
Respondent No.2/GCZMA shall act upon the complaints filed by the Applicant from time to time and pass orders in accordance with law within two (02) months."
4. Despite the above order, the Respondent has not taken any action. The Respondent is acting in hand in glove with the violators. The Applicant repeatedly approached the Respondent but each time, they were assured that action would be taken but to no avail. Feeling constraint, the Applicant filed Execution Application No. 06/2017 (WZ), which was disposed of vide order dated 21.04.2017 with the following direction:-
"Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 GCZMA has placed before us the extracts of Minutes of the 146th Meeting of GCZMA held on 11.4.2017, wherein GCZMA has taken decision on the complaints moved by the Applicants and directions in accordance with the said decision will shortly be issued perhaps within a week. In view of this Page 2 of 5 nothing survives in the present Execution Application. Execution Application No.06/2017 is closed."
5. Pursuant to that, the GCZMA had passed order dated 16.05.2017, ordering demolition of the structures but the said structures still exist. Since thereafter, nothing has happened. The learned Counsel for the Respondent says that some Execution Application was again filed by the Applicant, which was later on withdrawn.
6. Feeling compelled, the Applicant had to file another Execution Application No. 23/2017, where-on this Tribunal had passed order dated 01.11.2017 recording that the Applicant seeks permission to withdraw the present Application with liberty to initiate an appropriate proceedings and that the said permission was granted and the Execution Application was disposed of. The said order is annexed at Page No. 35 of the paper book.
7. The learned Counsel for the Applicant says that since thereafter, no action has been taken till now.
8. We find that this application was first taken up for consideration on 30.01.2018 and notice was directed to be issued to the Respondent by RPAD as well as Dasti to show cause as to why the undertaking given to the Tribunal in Execution Application 06/2017 has not been complied with and also to report whether there is illegal construction in the restricted zone as mentioned in para 21 of the Application.
9. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned on various dates and was taken up on 13.07.2018 on which date, the GCZMA had prayed for time to submit response to Show Cause Notice and the matter was directed to be taken up on 31.08.2018. Since thereafter, this matter is being taken up today after a gap of four years. But even now, no reply affidavit has Page 3 of 5 been filed from the side of GCZMA, which is a thing of great concern for us because in a matter of such great importance, the reply has not been filed for so long.
10. Today, from the side of Respondent No. 1/GCZMA, learned Counsel Ms. Ruchira Gupta has appeared through Video Conferencing and sent us an e-mail dated 16.02.2023, where-with an order was passed by the GCZMA dated 15.10.2020 along-with Corrigendum Order dated 19.10.2020 and with it, also is annexed the memorandum dated 22.10.2020.
11. From the replies which are on record through e-mail, it is apprised to us that pursuant to the demolition order dated 16.05.2017 passed by the GCZMA, a compliance report was received from Deputy Collector, Canacona dated 29.06.2017. The Complainant approached the NGT by filing Original Application No. 12/2018 (present Original Application) thereafter.
12. Pursuant to the filing of the said case, the GCZMA had sought verification report regarding demolished illegal structures from Mamlatdar, Canacona and in the report which was sent by Mamlatdar, it was mentioned that offenders have re-constructed/re-erected the structures in the same property. The matter was thereafter placed in the Meeting of the GCZMA held on 09.10.2020 and issued fresh order of demolition imposing penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs on each of the violators and also issued a show cause notice on the violators as to why they should not be prosecuted against Section 15 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Although we find that there is discrepancy in the averment made by the Applicant itself as in para no. 17, the Applicant has named 9 violators, while in the table given in para no. 21, only 7 violators have Page 4 of 5 been mentioned. Therefore, we want a clarity on this point from the Applicant as well, which will be done by the Applicant by the next date.
13. We were contemplating to impose heavy cost on the GCZMA for not filing reply affidavit despite the opportunity having been given to it since 13th July, 2018, but by way of last opportunity, 7 days' time is allowed to file the reply affidavit, stating clearly as to whether the violators who have been named in the application of the Applicant, whose structures which were found to have been raised in violation of CRZ norms, have been demolished or not in clear terms.
14. Put up this case for our consideration and final argument on 28.02.2023.
15. Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM Dr. Vijay Kulkarni, EM February 17, 2023 Original Application No. 12/2018(WZ) P.Kr Page 5 of 5