PANAJI
The High Court of Bombay at Goa on Wednesday issued notices to the State government, Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA), Tourism Department, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Town and Country Planning Department, local MLA and others on a PIL challenging the constitutional validity of the Goa Erection of Shacks on Public Beaches (Regulation and Control) Act, 2024.
A group of locals led by Desmond Alvares filed the Public Interest Litigation, contending that the Act exceeds the State Legislature’s powers and conflicts with central environmental laws and the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification, 2011. They also alleged violations of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
The petition stated that the Act permits structures up to nine metres (G+2) and does away with requirements such as structural stability certificates, load calculations, architect conformity letters, and completion and occupancy certificates. It alleged that the Act also bypasses existing building regulations and the National Building Code.
It further alleged that the Act does not require assessment of zoning, Floor Area Ratio or coverage, potentially allowing construction in No Development Zones and orchards. Technical clearances have allegedly been replaced by a Tourism Department ‘Certificate of Satisfaction’ covering access, coverage, height and setbacks.
The Act, it added, is repugnant to the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and CRZ Notification, 2011, and was neither reserved for nor received Presidential assent under Article 254(2). The PIL, which also names MLA Michael Lobo among the respondents, focuses on Survey No. 354/1 at Anjuna and alleges construction in a No Development Zone within 200 metres of the High Tide Line (HTL). “The property is about 44 metres from the HTL and sand dunes six to seven feet high have been flattened, beach vegetation removed and six-metre-high cast-iron pillars installed on concrete foundations,” it stated.
It also alleged that around 40 truckloads of sand were extracted, a borewell was installed and the property was divided between Orchard and Settlement zones under the Regional Plan 2021.
The petitioners have sought a fresh inspection by independent experts, an investigation into the alleged sand extraction, revocation of GCZMA permission and restoration of the site.
As interim relief, they have sought a stay on the operation of the 2024 Act, maintenance of status quo on constructions under it and a specific stay on construction at Survey No. 354/1. The petition also seeks directions restraining authorities from granting further trade, excise, consent-to-operate, electricity or water permissions to the project.
