Goemkarponn Desk
CANACONA: Acting on the directives of High Court of Bombay at Goa, Canacona Municipality has sealed a Restaurant and Resort operating on the Paddy fields at Nagorcem-Palolem at Canacona on Friday.
On Thursday, the High Court of Bombay at Goa has directed the Canacona Municipal Council’s chief officer and the South Goa Deputy Collector to seal the Restaurant and Resort operating at two different locations on the paddy fields at Nagorcem-Palolem, within the next two days.
Canacona Municipality team led by Chief Officer Mangaldas Gaonkar approached the Restaurant situated near Patnem along-the-MPCBR(Manohar Parrikar Canacona Bypass Road) and the Resort located just at the entrance of Palolem village and sealed both the properties in according with the Court directives on Friday.
According to reports, the division bench comprising justices Mahesh Sonak and Valmiki S A Menezes told the deputy collector to inspect the site since there is a complaint about the lack of a conversion sanad.
The deputy collector has already initiated proceedings over the illegal conversion, advocate general Devidas has told.
The said reports said, after the municipality attempted to inspect the constructions but were prevented from doing so, the HC in March had directed the police to assist the municipality.
When the case came up for hearing on Thursday, the advocate representing the parties told the HC that he was unable to obtain any instructions from them on whether they have any licences for setting up and operating a restaurant and resort.
Advocate Marie Pereira representing the Canacona Municipal Council said that the council has not issued any permissions for the structures. It has issued a show-cause notice but no reply was filed. If the parties had any permissions, they would have been immediately produced before the court, the HC observed.
“Prima facie illegal operations cannot continue by simply stating the lawyer has no instructions.”
In March, the HC granted the parties an opportunity to file an affidavit or at least produce permissions regarding the structures in question but that was not done.
“This is more than sufficient to presume at least prima facie that the structures put up by the second and third respondents are backed by no permission from any authorities,” the HC said.
The respondents have been restrained by the HC from using the premises for commercial or any other purpose.
