Another playground for the privileged
Herald Review August 17, 2014
Should the government protect the interests of a private party— in this case one of the biggest hotel groups in the country— or a village? Herald Review revisits the case of the Aguada plateau where the Candolim- Sinquerim villagers continue to resist relinquishing their rights to the land.
LISA ANN MONTEIRO
The government has been tying itself up in knots from the moment it acquired over 3 lakh sq mt land of the Aguada plateau from the Candolim comunidade ( for a pittance) and tried to give it on a platter to the Taj Group of Hotels for the development of a ‘ recreational park’.
The comunidade which has been battling the case for years— determined to get a higher compensation for the land— has got little reprieve so far from the authorities. On Thursday, the additional director of panchayats who has been hearing both the parties over the past few weeks declined a petition by the interveners who had asked for a site inspection with all authorities present.
The villagers of Candolim and Sinquerim, interveners in the case, have been fighting the project tooth and nail.
The government paid the Candolim comunidade a petty Rs 10 per sq mt when they acquired 3,13,630 sq mt of the prime property on Aguada plateau in 1983.
The comunidade took the government to court over the paltry compensation rate. In 2004, the High Court of Bombay at Goa dismissed the comunidade’s appeal stating that the claimant could not prove the land deserved a higher market value. The court said in view of the arguments put forward by Advocate General ANS Nadkarni that the land had “ no potential for development” because of the restrictions under various statutory provisions, the petitioners had no case to claim Rs 300 per sq mt as the market value. The AG had submitted that there were several factors to show that the land in question could not be developed for either building or any commercial activity in the future.
As it turns out, the property on Aguada plateau with a sea facing view does have commercial viability, and that’s why the Governor of Goa signed a lease agreement with M S Hotels Ltd Director, leasing out the over 3 lakh sq mt for a total lease period of 99 years ( till 2096) for the development of the plateau as a ‘ recreational park of international standard with allied facilities’.
The lease agreement speaks of a recreational park with amusement rides, water rides, electronic amusement, mini zoo, mini lagoon, children’s theatre, village shopping arcade, local arts and crafts museum, convention all hall for exhibitions and local festivals, mini golf course, lawn tennis court, badminton court, club house among other facilities. Oddly the amusement rides and water rides find no mention or representation in the project’s plan raising doubts about whether the project is in fact a recreational park or private resort.
Looking back at old records, the villagers of Candolim find that the conversion from orchard to settlement was kept under wraps and was never published in the official gazette. The property along with 30 odd properties came up for change in use of land in 1998 before the 84th meeting of the town and country planning board chaired by the then Chief Minister Pratapsingh Rane. In a gazette notification soon after dated December 4, 1998, all the other properties find mention except the Aguada property S/ No 96/ 0. The property today is still designated as orchard in RP 2001 and RP 2021.
The government continued to bend over backward to fraudulently obtain permissions. When the Goa Coastal Management Zone Authority ( GCZMA) pointed out that the proposed construction of the recreational park was falling within the no development zone ( within 200 mt from the HTL) as per CRZ notification and requested the party to revive the proposal by shifting the development outside the 200 mt, the hotel in their reply in August 1999 wrote, “ Kindly note that 7 buildings planned for various health facilities, out of total 11 buildings in the proposed project come within the belt now identified by you as the no development zone and the same cannot be relocated now elsewhere, as such relocation will disturb the recreational facilities planned in the remaining area. Moreover the entire economics of our project will be adversely affected, in the event of the plans being modified, thereby making the project economically unviable.”
In their reply in October 1999, the GCMZA reiterated that the CRZ notifications of 1991 prohibit development within the belt of 200 mt from HTL. The letter states that the CRZ notifications “ permits only hotels/ resorts in designated areas of CRZ III ( with prior approval of the MOEF) and restricted number of dwelling units within the ambits of ‘ traditional rights and customary uses”. Oddly the GCMZA in the same letter suggested that the hotel ‘ revise’ their project. The authority said that ‘ the proposal should be conceived as a recreational resort’ instead ( see box GCZMA advice to Taj).
Helping hand
The collusion between the government and its various departments in obtaining permissions for the project continued.
In a letter to Taj in 2002 deputy superintending archaeologist of Mini Circle Panjim, G S Narasimha asked the hotel “ not to go ahead with the proposed project in the above specified areas and without observing the formalities such as obtaining ‘ no objection certificate’ from director general ( ASI New Delhi) which are mandatory”.
In the same letter he also wrote, “ Fort Aguada both upper and lower comprising the fort walls, bastions and other remains inside is declared as a centrally protected monument as per Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Site and Remains Act 1958.Further as per the 1992 Gazette notification under the said act, the area up to 100 mt and further up to 200 mt surrounding the monument has been declared as prohibited and regulated areas respectively for the purpose of mining and construction activities.”
He added, “ These national monuments are precious heritage of our land and our utmost duty is to preserve it for posterity. In the name of development, such projects coming up next to the protected monument will certainly have its impact in endangering the ancient ambience of the locality and consequently damaging them.”
Three years later the hotel receives no NOC from the director general of ASI but instead receives approval from N Taher deputy superintending archaeologist, Mini Circle Panjim.
Indian Resort Hotels had appealed before the Director of Panchayats ( DP) in 2002 and again in 2005 after the Candolim panchayat refused to give the party a license. The matter has remained pending ever since before the DP. Indian Resort Hotels approached the High Court of Bombay at Goa which directed the DP to dispose of the petition on or before August 31, 2014.
The villagers of Candolim and Sinquerim involved with the case say they want the land— the last piece of non commercialized open space left in entire Candolim— to be preserved for their children.
They claim the government has obtained permissions fraudulently for the hotel and the lease is nothing but a backdoor method of sale of their comunidade land. They fear that the government will give a blanket order to the panchayat to ‘ process’ the file.
“Who is the deciding authority in this case? He is a paid servant of the government. What justice can we expect when the government is an interested party? There should be a separate judicial officer handling the case. Public interest should be kept supreme over private interest,” one intervener from Sinquerim said.
GCZMA advice to Taj
Further the CRZ Notification permits only Hotels/ Resorts in designated areas of CRZ III ( with prior approval of the MOEF) and restricted number of dwelling units within the ambits of ‘ Traditional Rights and Customary uses’.
As such your present recreational park project proposal may be revised in terms of the following:
( i) The proposal should be conceived as a Recreational Resort.
( ii) The layout of the Resort should be modified so that is strictly abides by the provisions of the CRZ Notification in terms of NDZ, coverage, FAR, Height.
( iii)… approach the concerned office of the ASI for guidance while revising the project proposal….).
http://epaperoheraldo.in/Details.aspx?id=17673&boxid=18538718&uid=&dat=08/17/2014
Review Bureau