PANAJI
The Archaeological Survey of India had formally warned that no new construction -- either horizontally or vertically -- could be permitted at the site of the controversial bungalow within the UNESCO World Heritage precinct at Old Goa.
The ASI, whose formal communication with relevant authorities has been annexed with the Supreme Court-appointed inspection report, had restricted permissions strictly to repairs of an existing structure without any expansion.
The ASI’s old site inspection note, prepared while examining an application for a no-objection certificate, had then made clear that the proposed residential house fell entirely within the protected area of the Church of St Cajetan and the Arch of the Viceroy, both centrally protected monuments. The applicants were listed as Jose Maria de Gouveia Pinto and Maria Linette de Abreu Gouveia Pinto.
“Since the proposed construction is entirely new, permission cannot be granted as it falls in the protected area,” the ASI recorded, adding that only repairs to the existing structure, as it is, could be considered, without any horizontal or vertical addition. It further noted that granting permission for new construction in such a zone was beyond the mandate of the National Monuments Authority.
Despite these explicit directions, the Supreme Court–mandated inspection found that the existing structure at the site was demolished and replaced, raising serious questions about how the work proceeded in the face of clear ASI objections.
The inspection report also attached an earlier ASI letter dated November 16, 2018, sent by the Goa circle to ASI (Monuments) in New Delhi, which described the site as containing only a small dilapidated hut that had been unoccupied for years.
The hut, the ASI noted, appeared in the Gazette notification of June 1, 1968, when Old Goa’s monuments were declared centrally protected under the AMASR Act, 1958.
That letter questioned claims that if a residential house had existed on the property since 1931, no objection was raised at the time of notification. It also recorded that no permission was sought or granted by the ASI for repairs or renovations after alleged cyclone damage in 1992.
“The said property falls in the protected area of the Church of St Cajetan, Old Goa. The only structure standing at the site is a small dilapidated hut which is not occupied by anyone for the last many years. Even in the map of gazette notification of June 1, 1968 plan of the same hut as the existing can be seen. The CPM in Old Goa was notified on June 1, 1968. However, if the house was existing from 1931 no objection was raised when their said property was included in the protected area. Neither permission was sought from ASI for repairs after the so-called destruction by cyclone in 1992,” the ASI’s official communiqué read.
It thereafter stated that “permission may be considered only for repair or renovation” to the existing structure at the site, without any horizontal or vertical expansion, as it was located within the World Heritage area.
The findings are contained in a report submitted to the Supreme Court by Edgar Fernandes, retired District and Additional Sessions Judge, Goa, who was appointed by the apex court to inspect and supervise the assessment of the disputed site.
Justice Fernandes was tasked with inspecting Plot No. B, admeasuring 2,400 square metres, located at Survey No. 4/1 of Village Ella, Old Goa, and owned by Suvarna Lotlikar. The inspection followed a Supreme Court order to examine the permission for repairs granted by the Director (Monuments-II) on February 3, 2020.
