PANAJI
The Bombay High Court at Goa on Monday issued a contempt notice to the Director of Tourism and Suneel Anchipaka, Director of Tourism, to show cause as to why action under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 should not be initiated against him for failing to act against a restaurant that encroached upon the public beach at Vagator despite orders of the High Court.
Similar notices have also been issued to the owners and operators of the restaurant for continuing to operate the restaurant despite demolition orders.
The High Court had directed the authorities to take immediate steps to remove the encroachment from the public beach in terms of the impugned notice. The Court had also directed the operator to stop using the encroached portion for any commercial purposes pending the removal of the encroachment. The authorities were also directed to ensure this so that no premium is drawn based on frivolous defences or inaction.
However, the petitioner approached the High Court alleging that no action was taken and the operators neither stopped the commercial activities nor demolished the encroached portion of the structure.
Similarly, the petitioner complains that the Director of Tourism also did nothing to ensure that the owners/operators stop the commercial activity forthwith or demolish the encroached portion and that the restaurant continued commercial activity through the encroached and unauthorised portion without any action from the Director of Tourism.
“This matter had come up before us on 10.01.2024 and we had requested the learned Advocate General to find out whether our order was complied with or not. Today, learned Advocate General states that on 12.01.2024 the Director of Tourism issued a notice to stop all commercial activities. A copy of this notice was also addressed to the Police Inspector concerned. Thus, the above, prima facie, indicates that the Director of Tourism did nothing from 14.12.2023 even though our directions were clear that immediate action had to be taken at least to stop the commercial activities. Even as of today, there is no clarification whether the commercial operations are stopped or not,” the High Court observed.
In mid-December, the Bombay High Court at Goa ordered the removal of a bar and restaurant built right on the Vagator beach and dismissed a petition filed by the restaurant operator arguing that the structure was on his private land and not on the government-owned beach.
“From the photographs, it is evident that the Petitioner has, with impunity, encroached upon the public beach. The construction is right on the public beach and very close to the seashore and the rocks on the beach. The survey reports establish encroachment by the petitioner to the extent of 476 square metres on the public beach, i.e. property belonging to the Director of Tourism (Government of Goa). The photographs corroborate this position. The defence that no survey was carried out and, therefore, there was some breach of the directions issued by us in our Order dated 06.12.2023 deserves no acceptance,” the High Court bench of Justices M S Sonak and Valmiki Sa Menezes had said.
“The concerned authorities must take immediate steps to remove the encroachment from the public beach in terms of the impugned notice, and the Petitioner must stop using this encroached portion for any commercial purposes pending the removal of encroachment. The Authorities must ensure this so that no premium is drawn based on frivolous defences or inaction,” the High Court had also said.
