Trust directed to stop drawing water, seal well within 30 days or face action
MARGAO
The Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority has directed a trust to raze down all the illegal structures located at Colva village.
The GCZMA has further directed the party to stop drawing water from the well and also seal the well existing in the property within one month from the receipt of this order.
Failing which the concerned Deputy Collector/ SDO of Salcete, Margao has been directed to demolish the offending structures and ensure compliance of the directions. Further, Dy Collector & SDO of Margao has been directed to submit a compliance report to the GCZMA within next 3 days of expiry of the 30 days’ time period.
In his order, GCZMA Member Secretary Sachin Desai said the Authority was of the considered view that almost all the structures existing in the property in question of village Colva are illegally constructed, as only 100 sq mtrs plinth can be termed as legal under CRZ notification. He, however, said it is difficult to identify and locate the said plinth/ house at loco since the 100 sq mtrs area has been subsumed into the illegal structure thereby losing its separate identity.
The GCZMA has issued the directions 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. 6071(E) dated 27/12/2022 issued by the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India.
In the order, the Authority observed that in an environmental matter its bounded duty of the Respondent to justify the construction carried out at site with the help of relevant documents such as NOC/ permissions/ approved plans/ other supporting documents obtained from competent authorities. The role of the complainant is limited to bringing the alleged violation to notice of the authority. The Respondent cannot shy away from producing relevant documents in the matter pertaining to property and structures at loco, the order added.
The Authority further noted the subject matter property and the structures are admittedly within the No Development Zone. The Authority found merit in the submission of the complainant that the structures existing in present state at loco cannot be said to have existed prior to 1991.
The Authority noted that the respondent has failed to place on record any permissions/ NOC in respect of other House Nos 102, 102/2, 294, 294/1 and construction thereof, adding “In absence of valid permission/ NOC from competent authorities the same can only be treated as violations being additional constructions.”
