Jai Bhuvan Builders the promoters of the mall submitted that the issue related to restriction of activities along the national highway squarely falls under the National Highways Act and not within the purview of the National Green Tribunal Act. They also argued that 'No Development Zone' that has been repeatedly used and argued by the applicant is alien, even to the National Highways Act.
..........
NGT dismisses case against Mall de Goa; fines petitioners
THE GOAN NETWORK
PANAJI
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has dismissed a petition filed by the Goa Paryavaran Sangarsh Samiti challenging the permissions granted to Jai Bhuvan builders to construct Mall de Goa along the highway at Porvorim and imposed a cost of Rs 10,000 on the petitioners for filing a frivolous application.
The Samiti had alleged that the construction activities of the mall has caused illegal and unauthorized construction of huge environmental hazardous mega construction project, right in the ‘No Development Zone’ of National Highway 17 and should not have been given an environmental clearance.
They further alleged that due to certain political and other vested interests, mandatory guidelines of maintaining 75mts NDZ of National Highway, with regards to the NH-17 have been diluted and deviated for the project area from 75mts to 40mts by the chief engineer of the National Highways and by the chief engineer PWD.
However, in their defence Jai Bhuvan Builders the promoters of the mall submitted that the issue related to restriction of activities along the national highway squarely falls under the National Highways Act which is not listed in the schedule appended to National Green Tribunal Act.
They further argued that the term 'No Development Zone' that has been repeatedly used and argued by the applicant is alien, even to the National Highways Act.
By merely quoting that there is environmental damage or degradation, the provision of Section 15 of NGT Act cannot be invoked, unless there is clear finding or decree or report by the competent authority or by the Court establishing the environmental degradation or damage that will enable the applicant to invoke section 15 of NGT Act,” they argued adding further that the applicants are not the persons who have suffered any damages as contemplated in section 15, and therefore, is not entitled to file this application.
The NGT ruled in favour of the builders of the mall and proceeded to impose costs on the petitioners.
“As far as the restriction on the national highway width, we are of the considered opinion that the issue falls within the domain of National Highways Act which is outside the purview and mandate of the National Green Tribunal. Therefore, the applicant cannot raise an issue challenging and prohibiting the road widening area of National Highway No 17. The remedy lies somewhere else,” the bench ruled.
We have taken a note that the applicant is a group of people who are involved in environmental litigation. It is expected that such group of people should have been more conscious and aware about the legal framework which is required to file such application considering this, we impose a cost of Rs10,000 on the applicants which shall be paid to respondent within four weeks.
