MAPUSA
The demolition of structures belonging to the Bastian Club at Morjim could not be carried out as the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) survey is currently underway in Goa, the District Collector of North Goa and the Deputy Collector and Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Pernem informed the National Green Tribunal (NGT).
The authorities said demolition action can be taken only after February 14, once the SIR process and publication of the final electoral roll are completed.
The submission was made in response to the NGT’s earlier directions in an application filed by a local Ajit Volvoikar against the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) and other respondents.
The tribunal noted that the explanation offered by the district administration vindicated the applicant’s contention that the structures ordered to be demolished had not yet been removed.
Taking note of the communication of the authorities, the green tribunal observed that the demolition had been deferred solely due to the ongoing SIR exercise.
During the hearing, counsel for GCZMA submitted that the original demolition order had since been reviewed by the coastal authority with respect to survey numbers 118/1-S-1, 118/1-S-2 and 118/1-S-3.
The tribunal directed that the affidavit be brought on record and further instructed the registry to issue notices to the remaining respondents, granting them four weeks to file their replies.
The matter has been posted for further hearing on March 13.
The case traces back to GCZMA’s decision to order demolition of certain structures at the Bastian Club in Morjim owned by Bollywood star Shilpa Shetty, citing alleged violations of coastal regulations.
However, the club’s management challenged the order before the NGT, arguing that the coastal authority had acted in violation of principles of natural justice by failing to issue a show-cause notice or grant an opportunity of hearing before passing the demolition directive.
Following the challenge, GCZMA reviewed and subsequently withdrew its demolition order in respect of specific survey numbers, a move that became a key point of contention in the proceedings.
The applicant has maintained that despite the original demolition directions, no action was taken on the ground, a claim now acknowledged by the district administration.
