Team Herald
PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa has issued notices to the Mapusa Municipal Council (MMC) and North Goa Planning and Development Authority (NGPDA) on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the Camarcasan Bundh Tenants Association and the Goa Foundation challenging the Town Planning Scheme (TPS) notified under the ODP of Mapusa on November 28, 2016.
The State government waived notice on behalf of various government agencies made respondents in the PIL including the Mamlatdar of Mapusa and the South and North Goa Collectors.
The petitioners have challenged the demarcation of land assigned for the TPS for Mapusa as shown in the notified Outline Development Plan of Mapusa 2021, in so far as it includes within it large tracts of agricultural and khazan land to be diverted for non-agricultural purposes, “an activity not permitted by law.”
The petition states that such diversion is in violation of the Goa Land Use Act, 1991, as majority of these fields are covered by the provisions of the Tenancy Act, 1964.
“If these land use changes are allowed, Mapusa city will lose more than 80 percent of its agricultural lands (nearly 18 lakh square metres). Further, a part of the area under the TPS II which is khazan area was protected and categorised as a No Development Zone under the CRZ Notification, 2011 when the ODP was notified. A TPS can only be taken up if the majority of owners agree to the scheme and other conditions are met,” it further states.
Camarcasan Bundh Tenants Association had already objected to the scheme at the time of preparation of the ODP. Subsequently, on behalf of its members it has formally withdrawn consent to the scheme under section 67 of the TCPA Act, 1974.
“No consultation has been carried out, as required under the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act with the local elected body. The Mapusa Municipal Council which, being an elected body would have to ensure consultation with wards. A development plan may only be prepared by the local authority, which is the Mapusa Municipal Council,” the petition further reads.
The Division Bench of the High Court comprising Justices Mahesh Sonak and Prithviraj Chauhan has sought replies from the respondents through the issuance of the notices.
