Goemkarponn is in possession of documents that reveal a revocation order was withdrawn for illegal construction in Bandora after the public agitation calmed down
Similar can be the case in heritage zone illegal construction in Old Goa
Goemkarponn desk
PANAJI: After the widespread agitation against the illegal structure in Heritage Zone, the Town and Country Planning Department has revoked the permissions issued by the department for the construction.
The construction is owned by the husband of BJP functionary Shaina NC’s husband and a local politician’s wife, Suvarna Suraj Lotlikar.
While the government has said that it has revoked the licences for illegal structure, Goemkarponn has laid its hands on past papers to say that the revocation order seems to be a gimmick.
In the past, such revocation orders were also issued only to be withdrawn after the issue calmed down.
Goemkarponn is in possession of two documents on how illegal permission was granted to Shree Ramnath Devasthan in 2012.
Thereafter, following the people’s agitation in Bandora, the TCP was forced to withdraw the permission.
However, after about a year, the TCP quietly withdrew its Revocation order after the issue calmed down.
Revocation order… (04/04/2013)
“Whereas Vide ref no TPP/Cont/Tinnd/42/1/2012/721
dated 14/09/2012, this office issued a Technical Clearance Order for the proposed construction of a Residential building in 1 no 42/1, Bandora village, Ponda Taluka, Goa for Stiree Ramnath Devasthan.
This office received various complaints from Shri Dattamm T. Nayakk and Adv. Shri Nigel da Costa Frias.
Whereas, on 27/02/2013, a joint site inspection of the site was carried out, including complainant Shri Dattaram T. Nayak and representatives of the applicant.
On perusal of the complaints and joint site inspection, show cause notice was served on the applicant asking why the Technical Clearance Order issued vide ref.no. TPP/Const/Band/42/1/2012/721 did 14/09/2012 shall not be withdrawn, citing various issues with regard to the Technical Clearance Order dtd.14/09/12.
Whereas, vide letter no. 4270/22.3.2013, dtd. 22/03/2013, the attorney of the applicant Shree Ramnath Devasthon, received by this office vide inward no.434 on 28/03/2013, submitted a detailed reply to the show-cause notice.
Whereas, after perusal of the reply to show cause notice and records available, the following are the conclusions:
a) With regard to points no.4a and 4d of the show cause notice, it is concluded that the applicant has failed to reply and produce documents pertaining to approval of additional structures shown on the site plan submitted for approval in addition to structures reflected in the survey plan. This results in submitting wrong plans and area calculations at the time of obtaining approval, thereby invoking clause no 2 of the Technical Clearance Order, which states that “the permission granted ball be revoked, if any information, plans, calculations, documents and any other accompaniments of the application are found incorrect or wrong at any stage after the grant of permission and the applicant shall not be entitlet for any compensation.”
b) With regard to point no 4b) of the show cause notice, i.e. regarding alleged illegal cutting of sloppy land, the applicant’s reply does not deny the fact that sloppy land has been cut without prior permission from the Chief Town Planner under section 17-A of the Town & Country Planning Act’1974.
Now, therefore, in view of the reasons cited above, Technical Clearance Order No. TPP/Cont/Tinnd/42/1/2012/721dtd. did 14/09/2012 hereby stands revoked.
Consequently, you are directed to immediately stop the construction activity in the property as permitted vide same Technical Clearance Order.
(Ritesh R. Shirodkar)
Dy. Town Planner
Withdrawal of Withdrawal order…(14/10/2014)
With reference to the above-mentioned subject, it is to inform you that the revocation letter issued by this office vide reference no.TPP/Const/Band/42/1/13 /376 dated 2/4/2013 has been withdrawn. Therefore the technical clearance orders issued vide reference no. TPP/Const/Band/42/1/13/376 dated 2/4/2013
stand valid.
This letter is issued based on the conversion recommended by this office vide letter no.TPP/Conv/Band/42/1/2013/690 dated 8/7/2013, NOC issued for cutting and filling land u/s 17A vide reference no. TPP/51/17A/Band/42/14/471 dated 30/06/2014 and letter dated 1/7/2014 of Shree Ramnath Devasthan and
concurrence from the Chief Town Planner vide reference
no. PP/386/Bandora/42/1/2014/1013 dated 22/09/2014.
(Ritesh R. Shirodkar)
Dy. Town Planner
In view of the above case, there is no guarantee that the government will not withdraw the revocation order issued in the Old Goa case.
Advocate Amit Palekar, who sat on a five-day hunger strike, says that he would fight the case in court now.
“We cannot trust this government. If the owners approach the court and the government does not defend the case properly, the owners could win, paving the way for constructions to be carried on,” he said.
Palekar said that he would fight the case legally now.
“We have got the order revoked, but that is not the end. If we keep quiet now, the government may withdraw the earlier order. So now we will fight the case legally,” he said.