Herald: Why did you send bouncers ? And why in the middle of the night?
Gerson Rebello: I wouldn’t call them bouncers but they are part of the team that would be required to carry out work of the company. They’re just officers well trained in martial arts than me.
As for the middle of the night, the owner considered it an auspicious moment and had a pandit come to do a puja before we began work.
We asked for them to talk, but they were threatening us. They abused me and my family, but I didn’t say a word.
Herald: But the High court order only put an interim stay on the NGT proceedings not NGT orders which clearly stated forbade you to cut any trees
Rebello: We have permissions. It’s outside the CRZ and we have some 81 permissions and have won over 115 tenancy cases. The judge at the NGT when the order of the felling trees was given had said that there would be no cutting of trees unless we had the permissions but we did have the permission from the forest department to cut trees.
Herald: There have also been questions raised as to the actual ownership of the land. What do you have to say about that? (Answered along with the company’s legal counsel)
Rebello: When we purchased the land, we did our investigation. When we asked the owner, he said there were no cases of tenants. So we approached the civil court when we started and filed against certain tenants that were claiming rights. Some cases were filed in the Mamlatdar and the negative declarations orders were obtained against the tenants. After that we got the projects approved as well as permissions including MoEF and CRZ clearance and we then started work. There are a few people who have become greedy. They are not tenants or have not been declared tenants but are still fighting. We have even offered them land but there are people telling them to fight. (take this also as a quote blurb). Everything has been purchased by the earlier landlord. So effectively we are the owners of the land, we have purchased it form the Khalap family.
—
Villagers vs Golf Course makers
In a petition filed to the Bombay High Court at Goa in December 2014 the St. Anthony’s Mundkar and Tenants Associaton & ors v/s the Chief Town Planner & ors claimed that efforts were made into withholding information from the court showing them as wrong entries and thereafter procuring orders claiming tenancy free certificates.
One such case sighted in the application speaks of one late Lawrence D’Souza.
“Lawrence D’Souza’s heirs have given power of attorney to Mr. Sandip Ganguli from New Delhi and Mr. Ryan Semelhago from Goa. Mr. Ganguli is the Chief Executive Officer and Mr. Ryan Semelhago is reported to be a local partner,” it says in the petition.
Most of the petitioners stated that they signed similar POA in favor of the same two individuals.
Lawrence who had in the past cultivated 14 plots the case under serial number 6/2 of the village had a purchase order for the land issued by the Mamlatadar of Pernem for all 14 plots. The land was first sold to Magus Estates and Hotels in 2006 to Sandip Ganguly, who was also the Vice President of the hotel which is now part of leading hotels.
“In none of the proceedings before the Civil Court or the Deputy Collector dealing with negative declaration and tenancy free certificates were the tenancy purchase judgement /orders dated 1993 and certificates of purchase dated 1998 of the tenancy prior to the date of filing of the suit brought on record,” it noted in the petition.
The villagers are now saying that had the tenant’s name been erroneously entered or if they were not inclined to proceed with the tenancy, the land was to be dealt with by the Mamlatdar or the provisions in the tenancy act. They claim that no such order was issued by the Pernem Mamlatadar.
