VASCO: Reacting to Herald’s sustained reporting and analysis over the vexed issue of the MPT reclaiming almost 6 lakh square metres from the Zuari river, land on which some of the major coal handling operations take place, prominent legal experts have opined that MPT’s actions are untenable.
Each of the persons Herald spoke to, currently have or have had a strong legal and constitutional law background.
The responses have been broken down under key points of the controversy between the MPT and the Goa government wherein the latter has explicitly stated that under Section 14 of the Goa Land Revenue Code, the ownership of the Goa government is absolutely final
Issue of ownership
Carlos Alvares Ferreira, Former advocate general of Goa, and an expert on constitutional matters states that merely notifying an area as a port – whether major or minor port – does not vest either authority with title or ownership of the land within that area notified or covered.
According to him, besides other arguments which are clear, a Goa government notification on July 9 is important. According to that, the Goa government granted 16,29.792 square metres to MPT.
“If all this land all property, vested in MPT, then there was no occasion for it to seek to obtain the land from the Government of Goa”, said Advocate Alvares
Issue of jurisdiction
On the issue of jurisdiction, Margao-based advocate and columnist Cleofato Almeida Coutinho said, “In simple words: think of a Planning & Development Authority (PDA): there is a PDA area notified, but all the land notified as PDA area, does not belong to the PDA to allow the PDA to enter and claim to have the right to do development upon private properties!
A Vasco-based advocate and activist who has been closely following this issue, Savio Correa, said “Port limits only indicate the regulatory jurisdiction of a port and do not confer any ownership rights on the authority. The 5.78 lakh sq. metres in dispute is a landmass illegally reclaimed by MPT from River Zuari riverine land for construction of coal terminals.”
Issue of apparent MPTs “muscle flexing” when the right to this land cannot be automatic nor assumed
Captain Viriato Fernandes of Goencho Avaaz organisation, in his view, opined that “the brazen attitude by the Deputy Chairman of MPT in debunking the claims of the government, including that of the Revenue Minister, shows to what extent MPT has usurped our land. They are clearly ‘muscle-flexing’.”
Savio Correia further said that the resurvey application filed before the Deputy Collector Mormugao “is a clever ploy by MPT to grab land of the Goa Government by back-door means. MPT was cornered on this issue by activists during the environmental public hearings in April 2017 and have resorted to such tactics to cover up their tracks”
Issue of Goa government protecting its own control and ownership of land
The Goa government has made its stand clear Assembly, But it needs to expedite the pending dispute in the court if the SDM Mormugao and take it even higher to settle what has the potential to be a landmark decision applicable nationally. Advocate Corriea went as far as to say that the Goa government should demand compensation from MPT from profits accrued to it through activity conducted on its land
Meanwhile former Union Minister Ramakant Khalap said that the Government of India should create a proper mechanism for resolving this issue. “There appears to be the conflict between local authorities such as Panchayat, Municipal Council and the Port Trusts wherever they are established.”
