PANJIM: The Supreme Court has reverted to the High Court for an expeditious hearing, the issues raised by the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Goa Foundation challenging the Outline Development Plans (ODPs) of Calangute, Candolim, Parra, Arpora and Nagoa.
It may be recalled that the Goa government had notified the two ODPs on December 15, 2022 and thereafter withdrew all the five villages as planning areas under the Town and Country Planning (TCP) Act. As a result of the withdrawal, the two ODPs were rendered invalid and the land use of the five villages reverted to the Regional Plan 2021.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
However, the government issued a circular dated December 22, 2022 by which it instructed the TCP Department to continue granting approvals on the basis of the withdrawn ODPs.
The circular was challenged by the Goa Foundation and the High Court was pleased to stay the operation of the circular by a detailed judgment dated February 14, 2024.
However, on February 28, 2024, the government issued an Ordinance by which it introduced Section 19(3) in the TCP Act to undo the effect of the High Court stay order. The Ordinance also allowed the ODPs to survive even when there was no planning area. This Ordinance was again challenged by the petitioner and the High Court passed a second order in May, this year, staying the two ODPs of these five villages till the hearing of the petition in the second week of July.
The State government, however, approached the Supreme Court with a special leave petition (SLP), which came up before the vacation bench which passed an initial order staying the order of the Bombay High Court.
Thereafter the Goa Foundation once again moved the Supreme Court for vacation of the stay on the grounds that the Goa Foundation had completed substantial portions of its research into all the changes made in the two ODPs relating to the eco-zones of the five villages.
The Supreme Court passed a brief order on the GF stay vacation application, and directed the High Court to hear the petition expeditiously and without any unnecessary delay. The court also directed: “While the matter(s) are being decided, the present position with regard to the concerned areas be maintained.”
