Frustrated by the Goa state government’s inaction, villagers and environmental activists took their agitation to Jantar Mantar in New Delhi.
While delegates protested in the national capital, concerned Goans held simultaneous demonstrations at Azad Maidan in Panaji to demand the complete scrapping of the project.
This could well be the first time that a protest from Goa has landed in the nation’s capital. Whether or not it resonates in the corridors of power to gain national attention remains to be seen.
While genuinely there are no attempts on the part of KGEA to compare their agitation with the Indian Farmers’ Protest of 2020-21 which is yet the biggest protest in the country’s history, the anguish that has brought the agitators to the ‘mecca of protests’ in Delhi couldn’t have been more obvious.
In the coastal state, land politics is fundamentally a matter of intense contestation over the commercialization of ecologically sensitive areas, the displacement of traditional communities, and controversial state policies that enable rampant land use conversion.
Section 39(A) as that controversial amendment to Goa’s Town and Country Planning Act has sparked major protests over fears it will enable development on natural and agricultural land.
It is an open secret that the measure was introduced amid a real-estate boom driven by buyers from major Indian cities seeking luxury second homes in the coastal state.
As one who has studied the impact of Goa’s land use planning, Solano Da Silva, an assistant professor at BITS Pilani, Goa Campus, has been quite assertive on this matter.
“This government operates on a fundamental contradiction: the belief that infinite growth – reduced in their view to mere real estate development – can be sustained within a finite ecosystem.”
“Goa has had a history of progressive and forward looking provisions like land to the tiller and statutory land use planning, with the latter ensuring that there are limits to where the market can go,” he reiterated.
“This regime has come out with a slew of legislative manoeuvers such as Sections 17(2) and 39A of the TCP Act, FAR and Building Height relaxations, and the Goa IPB Act which are undoing the progressive legacy that Goa has inherited,” Professor Solano added.
Established to provide speedy, time-bound clearances for investments through a single-window mechanism, the Goa Investment Promotion and facilitation Board (GIPB) has faced criticism. Activists allege that the board’s fast-tracking powers bypass standard environmental and regional zoning protocols.
Concerns regarding the impact of these ‘legislative manoeuvres’ on Goa’s environment and planned development are central to ongoing public and legal debates across the state.
Civil society groups, environmentalists, and political opposition have challenged these policies in court, arguing that they undermine the integrity of the state’s regional planning.
Despite the severe public backlash and critics unanimously agreeing that the ‘legislative manoeuvres’ disproportionately favours private developers and luxury housing properties, a seemingly nonchalant attitude maintained by the government is quite annoying.
The press and media has time and again reported on a surge in sophisticated land-grabbing syndicates and controversial real estate manipulations.
The breaking point has finally been reached regarding unchecked development, land grabbing, and the destruction of local ecosystems.
Town and Country Planning is a crucial aspect of urban development and land management. It helps manage land resources effectively, ensures safety, protects the environment, and promotes the orderly development of infrastructure.
“Town and Country Planning (TCP) is a government-regulated system that manages land use to ensure cities, towns, and rural areas develop in an orderly, sustainable manner. Planners design master layouts, establish zoning regulations, and balance environmental conservation with community development.” (Nimesh Malviya, Linkedin)
In Goa, the Town and Country Planning Department acts as the physical planning and development control authority under the T & CP Act of 1974. Their functions heavily rely on statutory and advisory frameworks.
But over the past few years, the TCP in Goa has faced severe backlash from activists, political figures, and the judiciary for its alleged arbitrary functioning. The controversy largely revolves around contentious provisions that bypass established zoning laws and public consultations.
The protest in Karapur-Sarvan is directly tied to the TCP department. Protestors are demanding that the TCP and other authorities withdraw the permission granted for the development.
The inaction on their part has prompted protestors to take their demands for TCP intervention and environmental protection to Jantar Mantar in New Delhi.
As a local daily put it, the TCP Minister’s feigned ignorance highlights the disconnect between the government and grassroots activists seeking to scrap the project.
The Minister’s dismissal of knowledge of the protests simply because he ‘does not watch TV’ exemplifies a deepening political deadlock over the contentious Karapur-Sarvan real estate development.
Because of the sheer frequency and intensity of political strikes; just as ‘bandhs’ and ‘hartals’ became culturally and politically synonymous with Kerala, protests have become a defining feature of Goa.
It is however difficult to brush them aside as machinations of disgruntled elements or as orchestrated dramas staged by the opposition to upset the government.
These grassroots agitations reflect genuine alarm over rapid and often opaque development, ecological destruction, and loss of local identity. Dismissing them as mere political theatrics ignores the systemic strain of mega-projects, land conversions, and infrastructure failures on Goan communities.
Whether the Karapur-Sarvan agitation proves to be a political Pandora’s box for the Goa government depends heavily on how it handles the movement.
