PANJIM: While political potshots and allegations of selling land to non-Goans have taken over the narrative of the controversial 85 room hotel project in the hinterland of Curtorim, the full picture based on documents show that the project was given a go ahead by Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar, albeit subject to strict conditions, over ruling clear misgivings that the Secretary Town and Country Planning Parimal Rai had.
The technical clearance was issued only after the approval stamp was received, giving the project developers time to fulfill the remaining conditions. (Related report on pg 6)
The issue assumes significance, not only because of one specific project but because it highlights how projects which need to be matched with Regional Plan 2001 and the perennially held in abeyance RP 2021 are being cleared without passing Parrikar’s own test, that they have to conform to the common land use earmarked in both plans. But above all, this project brings the spotlight completely on the chief minister and his role and knowledge in clearing it.
This exact role, in his capacity as Town and Country Planning minister needs to be placed on record so that any future discussion on this project is in context. And unlike some interpretations in a section of the media, that Parrikar himself was bypassed by his own town planner, that isn’t quite so since his clear instructions were to give the technical clearance for the project, subject to certain conditions being made post facto, pending which the final completion certificate wouldn’t be given.
The decision to give the 85 room hotel project of M/s Ira Exotica technical clearance, was taken on this all important note of the Town and Country Planning Department. The town planner sent a detailed note for directions, recommending clearance subject to assurances of post clearance conditions. The file moved from town planner to senior town planner to the chief town planner, the controversial ST Putturaju, all of whom cleared it till it reached the table of the Principal Secretary TCP, Parimal Rai.
We reproduce his noting on June 2, in toto before explaining what he meant. “May please peruse the note from pages 9/N to 13/N. On perusal it is observed that ‘A’ on page 10/N has contradiction ‘No devp slope’ and ‘gentle slope’ within permissible limits. This needs clarity as it is against RP 2021, Secondly ROW(Road Widening) of 8 mts does not exist at present and is proposed. Section 4 is yet to be issued for acquisition ( ‘c’ on page 12/N), though part widening has been done by local govt on the basis of NOC’s from land owners”.
Finally Parrikar, virtually by passing the TCP secretary’s reservations and the most crucial observation “This needs clarity as it is against RP 2021”, the chief minister, on June 4 noted, “E on pre page may be approved. All 3 conditions be strict preconditions to be followed” . The ‘pre’ condition was that completion certificate would be issued only after the development of the internal road and conversion would be obtained for commercial purpose instead of residential purpose
Rai’s notings are crucial. The note of the TCP dept broadly mentioned the following
a)The property is located partly in ‘settlement zone” and partly under “cultivated land zone” as per Regional Plan 2001. As per 2021, it falls partly in settlement zone and partly in orchard zone
b)The conversion sanad for land falling in “settlement zone” for residential purpose by the original owners Dionisio Edward Sardinha, Lydia Sardinha and others was obtained on 27/2/2009
c) Importantly the para marked A on page 10/N of the note. 9965 square meters of the property was converted which falls under settlement zone as per Regional Plan 2001. The Regional Plan 2021 shows a major portion under reference as ‘No development slope”. However the site under reference is not having steep slope and is only having gentle slope well within permissible limits. The secretary TCP had raised a query exactly on this same point wondering how the same land can have a no development slope and yet be inferred that it has a gentle slope within permissible limits
d) Importantly on page 12/N, the note mentioned that the TCP had sought the status of the development (widening) of the road for which NOC was granted for acquisition for road widening. The PWD replied that the publication of section 4 was awaited. To this the Secretary TCP commented that the road is only proposed but not yet completed.
However the chief ministers approval, even though with conditions paved the way for the issuance of the technical clearance, since the completion certificate would in any case be up for issuance at a later stage.
Importantly, the CM did not address the core issue that the project was fundamentally against RP 2021, since only a fraction of the land of survey no 20/11 lying within the settlement zone. 22 days after the CM’s approval the TCP issued a Technical Clearance Order on 26/6/ 2014 and a recommendation for conversion to commercial use.
