MARGAO: The Town and Country planning department allowed the South Goa Planning and Development Authority and other PDAs in Goa to use arbitrary procedures to prepare the Land use plan and Land use register. This was revealed by the SGPDA Member Secretary on Thursday while the PDA committee interacted with the public during a hearing regarding the preparation of Land-use Plan and Land Use register.
The rules for the preparation of the Land use plan and register are specified in the TCP notification No 4-40-74-UDD dated 10-3-1977. However, SGPDA Member Secretary Ashok Kumar claimed that the TCP has told the PDA that they don’t need to follow the notification. “They (PDA officials) had discussed the issue of land use map and register with the Chief Town Planners, Rajesh Naik and James Mathew. They (TCP) said they will amend the notification and in the meantime, you can go ahead”.
Since the current notification was still in force, till the time a new notification was passed, the SGPDA should have followed the rules, procedures and formats mentioned in the notification, says a source. However, the draft Land use plan and register was an extremely watered down and incomplete version of what should have been a comprehensive document and plan showing every structure, every road and every zone and list the specifications of these structures and plots, the source added. Such a comprehensive document, the source says, is the foundation of any planning and execution document such as the Outline Development Plan and the Comprehensive development plan.
The SGPDA hired a consultant to prepare the Land use plan and register. The consultant, Turbo Sketch, is the same firm that prepared the Regional Plan 2021, which also faces stiff opposition from all over Goa. Kumar claims that the consultant took the base plan and updated the plan using drones. The end result is that the draft plan shows nothing expect zones of existing structures. Important subgroups under the notification such as Institutional buildings, Government Offices, Cinemas, etc, have not been shown. Even spaces have not been shown in the land used plan. Legend of the Land Use plan has to be in accordance with clause 10 (1) of the notification, says the source.
The Land Use register which is prepared by the SGPDA shows only four columns, village, PT Sheet Number, Chalta Number and zone. The actual land use plan has to be prepared according to clause 10 (2) of the notification which specifies a prescribed format called “Form A”. For every plot in the PDA area, information such as plot area, number of structure, built-up area of each flow, FAR and even information about electricity, water and drainage has to be collected. This can only be reportedly done if the PDA visits every plot in the PDA area.
During the hearing, Kumar first claimed that the Form A has been prepared and is available. Later he changed his statement saying that “it is there but it is not yet completed and it is still under prepared. Simultaneously we are doing it”. However, the notification has no provision for a summary register of the Form A. The SGPDA appears to have violated the notification by opening an incomplete land use register for public suggestions, while reportedly is still in the process of being prepared and therefore incomplete.
Strangely, the PDA was accepting further suggestions for changing the Land use plan after it was open for objections under Section 27 of the TCP Act. According to the Member Secretary, objection means that if someone’s house is not shown, they can ask for corrections. However, this interpretation opens up scope for major changes in the land use map by scrupulous entities without leaving any scope for further objections by the people who will be affected by these changes, says another source. Under the Act, only “objections” can be accepted by the PDA. However, Kumar said that he will need to take a legal opinion on what constitutes as objections under the Act.
The SGPDA should have done a thorough job of collecting all the information as prescribed in the notification and drawing a detailed map showing all the structures, the source added. Instead, the SGPDA hired a consultant who prepared the plan and register using existing survey plans and documents without going in the field.
The consultant, to save his time, used a drone to take photographs and count the floors of buildings in an area. During the hearing, the PDA was able to produce the Work Order given to Turbo Sketch to prove that use of drone was a part of the tender. The Member secretary claimed that the decision for using the drone was taken at the PDA board meeting.
The use of a drone is an inaccurate and unscientific procedure since the drone is not a standardised tool for collecting such data. The Consultant, in his defence, claimed that his drones can even map geo-centric images but admitted that he did not use it while preparing the land use plan.
The use of drones is reportedly illegal unless prior permission of the Collector is taken only after specifying the exact use of the drone, the time and the place where the drone will be flown. In this case, the drone was used to take pictures without informing the residents of the area. The public was not made aware that a potential spying tool would be used to click photos of their property. This is a serious invasion of privacy, said the source. The PDA did not clarify whether the Collector’s approval was taken for this specific purpose.
The final land use plan had many discrepancies. Many structures have not been shown and also many roads have been widened but that is not reflected in the land use plan. Legal and illegal structures, like giant concrete dinosaurs structures in Madel village in Borda, have not been shown, the source said.
Only around 80 public objections had been received by the SGPDA. No doubt, many people were reportedly not aware that the plan and register were kept open for public. Many of those who did, have no knowledge of how to interpret the plans and maps in order to place their objections. The civil society had requested the PDA to ask local councillors take the SGPDA officials to meet their ward members to spread awareness. However, barring one ward councillor, others have reportedly not done it.
