Team Herald
PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa has directed the Calangute Village Panchayat to proceed with the demolition of 16 structures, as per the demolition order issued on December 22, 2011.
The Court also instructed the Block Development Officer (BDO), Mapusa, Bardez Taluka, to provide the necessary assistance within two weeks from the date of the order.
In March this year, the Calangute panchayat had written to Joseph Rosa, stating that he had failed to submit an approved plan, construction licence, and occupancy certificate for the structures listed in the demolition order. However, as the structures were not demolished, Sylvester D’Souza filed a writ petition seeking directions to the panchayat for their removal. Following this, an inspection was conducted on April 8, 2025, and the structures were again ordered to be demolished.
During the hearing, Advocate J A Lobo, counsel for respondent Joseph S Rosa, referred to directions previously issued by the Court in a 2020 public interest litigation (PIL) that instructed the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) to inspect the site to determine whether the structures violated Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) notifications.
Advocate Lobo pointed out that an earlier demolition order dated January 28, 2010, pertained to the demolition of the second floor of a ground-plus-two structure, while another order dated October 12, 2012, referred to the demolition of a ground-plus-one structure and a swimming pool. He submitted that, as per an inspection report, both these structures had already been demolished.
However, the Court noted that another site inspection, conducted specifically with reference to the notice dated December 22, 2011, and detailed in a report submitted by the panchayat secretary on April 8, 2025, confirmed that the structures shown in the attached sketches were still present on site and that no demolition had been carried out.
The Court observed that, as the Calangute Village Panchayat was now proceeding with the execution of the original demolition order, the respondent’s objections held no weight, since the structures in question were unauthorised.