For far too long, the National Highway expansion project passing through Bhoma has remained a festering wound in Goa’s infrastructure narrative. At the heart of the issue lies a fundamental question: why does the government continue to push a project that has seen consistent local resistance, when an alternative—though perhaps costlier—could solve the impasse once and for all?
The villagers of Bhoma have not been ambiguous in their stand. Their opposition to the current alignment of the highway is rooted in deep-seated concerns about displacement, destruction of homes, and damage to age-old religious structures that form the cultural and spiritual backbone of the community. They have persistently demanded a bypass route that skirts the village entirely, ensuring that their homes, livelihoods, and places of worship remain intact. Yet, despite repeated protests, memoranda, and public outcry, the government has shown little inclination to alter its course.
Chief Minister Pramod Sawant and PWD officials have maintained that no religious structures will be affected and no more than four houses are slated for demolition. This statement, while seemingly reassuring on paper, does little to address the larger sentiment of the villagers who perceive the project as an existential threat. For them, the issue is not merely about numbers—it is about trust, heritage, and the fear of being ignored by a state machinery that appears to prioritize convenience over consensus.
This deadlock is not just a social or political problem—it is a planning failure. The four-laning of the crucial Panaji to Anmod highway is a significant infrastructure upgrade meant to enhance connectivity, reduce travel time, and boost the economy. But every day of delay due to unresolved local opposition adds to the cost and undermines the credibility of the project. Ironically, Goa is spending thousands of crores on infrastructure elsewhere—new bridges, flyovers, and elevated corridors—without encountering the kind of resistance seen in Bhoma. This begs the question: if the state can splurge on such large-scale projects, what stops it from spending a little more to build a bypass that respects the local populace’s demands?
From a governance perspective, this issue should never have reached this level of friction. A sensitive, transparent, and consultative approach in the planning stages could have avoided the current stalemate. Instead, what we have witnessed is a top-down imposition of plans with little effort to take people into confidence. Token public hearings and superficial environmental clearances do not equate to true community participation. In a democracy, people must not be forced to choose between development and dignity.
The Bhoma issue also reflects a broader tension playing out across India—between infrastructure development and environmental, cultural, and social sustainability. Mega projects must not come at the cost of marginalizing voices that speak for local ecology, heritage, and livelihoods. Development is not just about concrete and asphalt; it is also about harmony, inclusion, and shared prosperity.
Resolving the Bhoma dispute once and for all would require political will, not just administrative assurances. It means going beyond mere damage control and embracing a genuine willingness to find a middle path. The bypass proposal, even if it adds to the project’s cost, could be the price of peace and progress. It would not only ease tensions but also allow the highway expansion to proceed without fear of prolonged litigation or protests. More importantly, it would demonstrate that the government listens.
A proactive government must anticipate resistance, not simply react to it. And when that resistance comes from ordinary citizens defending their homes and heritage, it deserves empathy, not apathy. The Bhoma standoff should not be reduced to a debate over numbers. It must be seen as a test of governance—of how inclusive, responsive, and humane our development models really are.
Goa cannot afford to let the Bhoma issue drag on indefinitely. It is time for the government to step back, reassess, and make a bold decision to realign the project through a bypass. This is not just about infrastructure; it’s about justice. And it’s long overdue.
