Plea Alleges amendment legalises illegal occupation of community land and violates constitutional safeguards
MAPUSA
A controversial amendment passed by the State government to regularise encroachments and unauthorised houses on Comunidade land has been challenged before the Bombay High Court at Goa. The petitioner has alleged that the law effectively legalises illegal occupation of community-owned land and violates constitutional protections.
The petition states that the insertion of Article 372-B into the Code of Comunidades allows illegal constructions built on Comunidade land before February 28, 2014, to be regularised through grants or allotments. According to the plea, this converts encroached community land into private property.
It argues that instead of removing illegal structures and taking action against encroachers, the State has chosen to “reward” them by granting ownership rights over land traditionally held for village communities.
The challenge has been filed by Trajano D’Mello, national spokesperson of the All India Trinamool Congress and a member of the Guirim Comunidade. The State of Goa, the Administrator of Comunidades and the Comunidade of Guirim have been named as respondents.
The petition describes Comunidades as centuries-old institutions unique to Goa, with roots in the ancient Gaunkari system that existed before Portuguese rule. It states that Comunidade lands are collectively owned by Gaonkars and managed for the benefit of village communities.
The petition relies on a July 2025 Supreme Court ruling in *Communidade of Tivim vs State of Goa*, which recognised Comunidades as a unique system of collective village ownership and reaffirmed the community nature of their lands.
D’Mello has argued that the amendment violates Articles 14, 300-A and 254 of the Constitution by depriving Comunidades of their property rights without following safeguards under central law.
The petition claims the amendment falls under the subject of “acquisition and requisition of property” in the Concurrent List and conflicts with the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Since the State law allegedly did not receive Presidential assent under Article 254(2), the petitioner argues that it is unconstitutional.
The plea further states that the amendment weakens existing State laws such as the Goa Land (Prohibition on Construction) Act, 1995, which bans construction on government and Comunidade land without prior permission.
It also refers to a March 2025 High Court judgment in a suo motu PIL directing authorities to identify and remove illegal structures from Comunidade and government land. According to the petitioner, the amendment was introduced to override those directions by giving retrospective protection to encroachers.
The petition further argues that encroachment and unauthorised occupation amount to criminal trespass and mischief under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and that the State Legislature has no authority to legalise such acts through retrospective regularisation.
The petitioner has sought a declaration striking down Article 372-B as unconstitutional and has also requested an interim stay preventing authorities from processing regularisation applications under the amendment until the case is finally decided.
