Activists question amendments, say participatory planning remains absent
PANAJI
The activist group-Goa Bachao Abhiyan has hailed what it termed a “people’s victory” in St Andre, crediting sustained resistance by the villagers of Siridao-Palem and local MLA Viresh Borkar for compelling the State government to suspend permissions granted under the controversial Section 39A of the Goa Town and Country Planning (TCP) Act.
In a strongly worded statement, GBA said the suspension of zone change permissions in St Andre constituency marks yet another chapter in Goa’s long-running struggle between unbridled land conversion and planned, participatory development.
Backdoor entry alleged
GBA convenor Sabina Martins said that Section 39A was “hurriedly introduced” in 2024 by TCP Minister Vishwajit Rane, allegedly to create “backdoor entry” for the conversion of ecologically fragile land for private and commercial interests. She alleged that such amendments are not isolated developments but part of a recurring pattern. “Goa has a history of such corrupt amendments. These changes are introduced to benefit a particular lobby, and to serve them, the entire planning framework of the State is thrown out of gear,” she explained.
Pattern in TCP amendments
Tracing the legislative trajectory, GBA pointed to earlier provisions – Sections 16B and 17(2) of the TCP Act — which it claimed were similarly used to facilitate land conversions under the guise of corrections or modifications to the Regional Plan. “First it was 16B, then 17(2) in the name of correcting the Regional Plan, and now 39A. These sections are helping only the big land sharks – whether outsiders or insiders. The point is that large land parcels are getting converted,” the group said.
The activists argue that repeated amendments undermine the sanctity of the Regional Plan, which is meant to guide Goa’s long-term, balanced development.
While clarifying that the organisation is not opposed to development per se, GBA stressed that growth must be sustainable and community-oriented.
Participatory planning questioned
The group lamented what it described as the absence of participatory planning in the State. Although constitutional provisions under the 73rd and 74th Amendments mandate decentralisation and greater involvement of local self-governing bodies, GBA claimed these principles have never been meaningfully implemented in Goa.
“We have a Regional Plan, but there is a lack of participatory process involving local bodies. There is no participatory planning, no balanced development,” the group noted.
With administrative remedies proving ineffective, GBA said it has increasingly been forced to approach the courts to challenge contentious land use decisions. “Since there was no option, we are fighting these matters in court,” the group said, highlighting the financial and emotional toll on ordinary citizens compelled to engage in prolonged legal battles.
Battle beyond St Andre
For GBA and allied groups, the St Andre episode is not merely about one constituency or one provision. It is, they argue, emblematic of a larger struggle over Goa’s land, ecology and governance model.
As villagers celebrate the temporary halt to Section 39A permissions, activists caution that the broader battle over land use policy in the State is far from over.
