Case Note & Summary
The matter concerns a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by two residents of La Oceana Colony, Dona Paula, Goa, against Union of India, Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority, Village Panchayat of Taleigao, planning authorities, the project proponent Fomento Resorts & Hotels Limited, and other authorities. The petitioners challenged the Government of India's decision dated 3 December 2001 allowing reclassification of four coastal stretches from CRZ-III to CRZ-II under the CRZ Notification, 1991 issued under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The Coastal Zone Management Plan of Goa, approved on 27 September 1996, had originally classified the areas from Cabo Raj Niwas to Dona Paula Jetty, Dona Paula cove/bay up to the line of existing authorised developments, and from Dona Paula cove/bay to Vainguinim Beach as CRZ-III, i.e., areas that are relatively undisturbed and do not substantially fall within built-up areas. The reclassification was sought by the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority on 1 December 2000 to bring these stretches under CRZ-II, which covers developed areas falling within municipal limits or legally designated urban areas. The petitioners alleged that the reclassification was effected at the instance of the hotel and builder lobby, contrary to the purpose of environmental protection, and that the stretches were not substantively built-up or provided with adequate infrastructure. They contended that the proposed hotel project of the fifth respondent on Survey No. 246/1 of Village Panchayat Taleigao, located behind the petitioners' colony, would cause ecological harm. The land was hilly, rocky, covered with vegetation, and inspection revealed it to be only 86.23 metres from the high tide line. The petitioners further alleged that the hotel project is an industry prohibited under the CRZ Notification; that consents under Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 were not obtained; and that the project was not located on the landward side of the existing authorised structure of the fifth respondent's existing hotel. The fifth respondent denied public interest and alleged mala fides, contending that Village Taleigao had been included within Panaji municipal limits since a 1995 notification and had been designated as urban. Interim relief was granted on 24 October 2007 restraining construction and approval of plans. During pendency, environmental clearance was granted on 26 December 2007, the National Coastal Zone Management Authority confirmed the reclassification, and in separate proceedings the seventh and eighth respondents directed issuance of construction license to the fifth respondent. All these decisions were also challenged in the petition. The judgment text available ends while recording the fifth respondent's affidavit, and no final decision is recorded. Therefore, the court's analysis, ratio, and directions are not mentioned.
Issue of Consideration
WRIT PETITION NO. 519 OF 2007 WITH MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (12) 85
Writ Petition No. 519 of 2007 with Misc. Civil Application No. 617/09 and Writ Petitions No. 420 & 474 of 2007
Shri V.B. Nadkarni, Senior Advocate with Shri M.S. Sonak with Shri P.S.Rao for the Petitioners; Shri C.A. Ferreira, Assistant Solicitor General for Respondent No.1; Shri S.S. Kantak, Advocate General with Shri A. Kamat, Additional Government Advocate for Respondent Nos.2, 7 and 8; Shri A.N.S. Nadkarni, Senior Advocate with Shri H.D. Naik for Respondent No.3; Shri Rafiq Dada, Senior Advocate with Shri M.S. Usgaonkar, Senior Advocate with Shri Sudesh Usgaonkar with Ms S. Kamat and Shri Abhijeet Dessai for Respondent No.5; Shri J. Godinho for Respondent No.6
Carlos Noronha, Antonio Rodriques
Union of India, Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority, Village Panchayat of Taleigao, North Goa Planning and Development Authority, Fomento Resorts & Hotels Limited, Goa State Pollution Control Board, The Dy. Director of Panchayats, The Addl. Director of Panchayats, National Coastal Zone Management Authority
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging reclassification of coastal stretches from CRZ-III to CRZ-II and related approvals for a hotel project.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to quash the reclassification of four coastal stretches from CRZ-III to CRZ-II, the approval granted to the 5th Respondent's hotel project, the environmental clearance, the decision of the NCZMA confirming the reclassification, and the order directing issuance of construction license.
Filing Reason
Petitioners, as residents of La Oceana Colony near the proposed hotel site, alleged that the reclassification from CRZ-III to CRZ-II was done to serve builder and hotel lobby interests, in violation of environmental norms and public interests, and that the project would cause ecological damage.
Previous Decisions
On 24 October 2007, the High Court admitted the petition and granted interim relief restraining construction and approval of plans. NCZMA passed a resolution confirming the reclassification during pendency. On 26 December 2007, environmental clearance was granted. The 7th Respondent allowed the 5th Respondent's appeal and directed issuance of license; the 8th Respondent dismissed the 3rd Respondent's appeal on 31 July 2007. The 3rd Respondent filed Writ Petition No. 474 of 2007 challenging that order.
Issues
Validity of reclassification of four coastal stretches from CRZ-III to CRZ-II
Validity of approval granted by GCZMA to the hotel project of the 5th Respondent
Validity of environmental clearance dated 26 December 2007
Validity of NCZMA resolution confirming reclassification
Validity of order dated 31 July 2007 directing issuance of construction license
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that reclassification benefited hotel and builder lobby, caused ecological degradation, stretches were relatively undisturbed and lacked infrastructure; the hotel project is an industry prohibited under CRZ Notification; distance from HTL was only 86.23 metres; consents under Air and Water Acts not obtained; project not landward of existing authorised structure; approved CZMP classified areas outside municipal limits as CRZ-II, making reclassification contrary.
5th Respondent contended no public interest, petitioners not affected, petition mala fide, Village Taleigao included in Panaji municipal limits since 1995, area already designated as urban.
Judgment Excerpts
the re-classification of the aforesaid four stretches was sought in order to sub-serve the interests of Hotel lobby and the builders' lobby
the inspection revealed that the distance between the nearest part of the proposed construction from high tide line is 86.23 metres
re-classification done is against larger public interests and is against the very object and purpose of the said Act of 1986 and the CRZ Regulations
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed under Article 226. On 24 October 2007, the petition was admitted and interim relief granted restraining construction and plan approval. On 26 December 2007, environmental clearance was granted to the hotel project. The 5th respondent appealed to the 7th respondent against the 3rd respondent's refusal of construction license; the appeal was allowed and license issued. The 3rd respondent's appeal to the 8th respondent was dismissed on 31 July 2007. The 3rd respondent filed Writ Petition No. 474 of 2007 contesting that order. During pendency, NCZMA passed a resolution confirming the reclassification. All these decisions were subsequently challenged in the present petition by amendment.
Acts & Sections
- Environment (Protection) Act, 1986: Section 3, Section 3(1), Section 3(3), Section 3(3)(2)(v)
- Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994:
- Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981:
- Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974: Sections 25, 26
- Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 51A(g)
