Allowing SEZs would result in another Nandigram, fears govt

PANJIM, JULY 29 Goa government fears that allowing Special Economic Zones (SEZs) in the State would result in another Nandigram like situation in the State. Advocate General Subodh Kantak on Thursday made the statement before the Bombay High Court at Goa while responding to the petitions filed by SEZ promoters and Public Interest Litigations (PIL) filed by the activists.

PANJIM, JULY 29
Goa government fears that allowing Special Economic Zones (SEZs) in the State would result in another Nandigram like situation in the State.
Advocate General Subodh Kantak on Thursday made the statement before the Bombay High Court at Goa while responding to the petitions filed by SEZ promoters and Public Interest Litigations (PIL) filed by the activists.
The AG said that Chief Secretary had prepared a white paper before scrapping SEZ policy, which had raised the fear of public furor like the one noticed in Nandigram.
Kantak also made it clear that as per the law, the State government has enough powers to scrap SEZ policy for the benefit of the State.
Pointing out that promotion of SEZ will burden the State infrastructure, AG cleared that being a small State, Goa does not have sufficient land in order to facilitate six SEZs.
“Apart from that nearly 60 per cent State’s water will be consumed by these SEZs which is not affordable,” he added.
Earlier, the promoters had alleged that State government has no power to scrap SEZ policy as it is a nationwide policy. They had also pointed out that public outcry cannot be considered as an important criteria for rolling back SEZ policy in the State.
The final argument over SEZ, which began on July 28 will continue to hear on August 4 and 5.
The six SEZ promoters include Meditab Specialities Pvt Ltd, Peninsular Pharma Research Centre Pvt Ltd, Paradigm Logistic & Distribution Private Ltd, Planetview Mercantile Company Pvt Ltd, Inox Mercantile Company Pvt Ltd and Maxgrow Finlease Pvt Ltd.
Apart from this, the villagers of Keri, Sancoale and Verna, had filed PIL questioning the GIDC’s decision for fraudulently allotting land in their respective villages on lease agreements to the SEZ promoters.
 

- Advertisement -

Add as preferred source on Google

If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.

Share This Article