PANAJI
The Bombay High Court at Goa on Wednesday rejected multiple applications that sought exemption from sealing as part of the ongoing drive against illegal structures operating along the Anjuna coast, ruling that permission from the village panchayat is mandatory for running a commercial establishment.
The High Court, however, granted relief to M/s Diana Buildwell Ltd (which operates the W hotel) and another applicant who said his structure was solely used for residential purposes and hence would not be covered by the High Court’s directions.
ALL PERMISSIONS NEEDED
Hearing the application filed by one Krishna B Parab, who told the Court that he had permissions including from the GCZMA, GSPCB, Tourism Department, Health Department, Construction Licence from the Village Panchayat and NOC from the Panchayat to commence business, the High Court ruled that permission from the TCP Department and consequently Occupancy Certificate was missing.
“At present, since the applicant’s structures have no permissions from the Town and Country Planning Department or any permission under Section 70 of the Panchayat Raj Act or even any Completion and Occupancy Certificate, it would not be appropriate to order the de-sealing and permit the Applicant to undertake commercial activities from such structures,” the High Court ruled.
“If the TCP grants the permission, it must also consider whether a completion Order/Certificate can be granted. If such a completion certificate/order is granted, the Panchayat should consider whether the Occupancy Certificate can be granted. Once all permissions are in place, the Applicant is granted liberty to apply for de-sealing,” the High Court also said.
In the case of another similar plea filed by Rahul Tibrewal, the High Court ruled that even though the applicant had permission from the GCZMA to set up ‘temporary structures’ that he would have to demolish after five years, the structure fell under the definition of building and consequently permission was necessary.
“The Applicant’s structures qualify as “building”. This definition is exhaustive and includes a structure constructed by using any materials whatsoever for any purpose, whether used for human habitation or not,” the Court ruled.
“The permission under Section 100 of the Panchayat Raj Act is by no means sufficient to hold that the structures put up by the Applicant have all the requisite permissions. Even under the Panchayat Raj Act, the definition of a “building” under Section 2(2) includes a shed or a hut. All that is excluded is a temporary structure erected on a ceremonial or festive occasion or a tent. None of the constructions put up by the Applicant can be regarded as temporary structures erected on ceremonial or festive occasions or a tent. The structures put up by the applicant hardly qualify as ‘Hut’,” the High Court said.
“Accordingly, for the present, in the absence of any permission under the TCP Act, the Goa (Regulation of Land Development and Building Construction) Act, 2008, the Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations, 2010, construction licence under Section 66 of the Panchayat Raj Act, Completion Order/Certificate from the TCP Department and Occupancy Certificate from the Panchayat, it will not be appropriate to modify our Order and exempt the Applicant’s structures from being sealed,” the High Court ruled.
“However, if the Applicant applies and obtains all the above permissions and other necessary permissions, the Applicant would have the liberty to apply for de-sealing. Further, if the Applicant applies for such permissions, the Authorities must try to dispose of such applications within 15 days,” the High Court also said.
EXEMPTIONS
Meanwhile, the High Court allowed a plea by one Sumiran Mehta to be exempt from sealing since he claimed his structure was purely residential.
“Since the structure of the Applicant in MCA No. 612/2024(F) is only a residential structure and the same is not being used for any commercial purposes, we clarify that our direction for sealing would not apply to the Applicant’s structure,” the High Court ruled.
“In the case of Diana Buildwell Pvt Ltd (W hotel) the High Court ruled that at least prima facie, the structures of the Applicant has permission from GCZMA, Panchayat, TCP Department, Completion and Occupancy Certificate, consent to operate from the Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB), Health NOC, Tourism Registration, Trade licence and Fire NOC. Considering the above material, we exempt the Panchayat from sealing the structures of the Applicant,” the High Court also said.
115 STRUCTURES SEALED
Meanwhile, the Village Panchayat Secretary has filed an affidavit stating that about 144 structures out of 175 have been inspected. The affidavit further states that 115 structures are sealed and 31 structures remain to be sealed. Within the next three-four days the balance sealing would be completed, the secretary told the Court.
