National Green Tribunal LASHES AT GOA AUTHORITY ON ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTIONS

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL LASHES AT GOA AUTHORITY ON ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTIONS

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) came down heavily on the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) for its failure to tackle the issue of illegal constructions within the coastal regulation zone.

The NGT said that 'the moment citizens start feeling helpless, it will damage democracy.'

The NGT Western Zone bench at Pune took offence to the GCZMA as it was repeatedly seeking more time while the appeal was being heard, thereby allowing the structures to remain standing.

The NGT bench headed by Justice Sheo Kumar Singh said that the (CRZ) Notification issued in 1991 has not been complied with till date and with the conspiracy aid and assistance of Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA), the polluters and violators of law are still continuing their activities. The NGT added, "When the law protector becomes the law violator, how will the law be protected? When the law protector becomes the law violators, how law will be protected. The basic principle of rule of law is to follow rule/ law and not to break or violate it."

"The action and construction is not only disregard to the law but it is negation of the authority of the State by the public official doing the act and expending the budget in accordance with their wishes."

The NGT observed that even where there is no ministerial duty, and even where no recognised tort such as trespass, nuisance, or negligence is committed, public authorities or officers may be liable in damages for malicious, deliberate or injurious wrong-doing. "There is a tort called misfeasance in public office, and which includes malicious abuse of power, deliberate maladministration, and perhaps also other unlawful acts causing injury", it added.

The NGT said that the Bombay High Court had suo motu directed that the land records be verified and corrected and structures existed as of February 1991 must be identified and illegal and unauthorized construction must be removed within a time frame, which was not complied with herewith.

Further, the NGT added, "The order revealed that the final decision must be taken within 90 days and demolition must be completed within 60 days. There was a condition that if there is appeal pending, the decision should be awaited. Under the guise of this pending appeal, the GCZMA promotes only the appeal, fails to submit the reply and continuously delaying in filing a reply and thus indirectly helping the illegal construction and this has become the business of GCZMA. In so many cases, we see that old cases are pending and no action is being taken by the GCZMA and replies are not being filed. This is highly objectionable and in violation of CRZ Rules."

The NGT also warned government servants in positions of power that they would be doing a huge disservice to society at large if they only further feelings of helplessness among the public.

"Under our Constitution sovereignty vests in the people. Every limb of the constitutional machinery is obliged to be people oriented. The servants of the government are also the servants of the people and the use of their power must always be subordinate to their duty of service.

"Harassment of the common man by public authorities is socially abhorring and legally impermissible. It may harm him (the common man) personally but the injury to society is far more grievous. Crime and corruption thrive and prosper in the society due to lack of public resistance. Nothing is more damaging than the feeling of helplessness. An ordinary citizen instead of complaining and fighting succumbs to the pressure of undesirable functioning in offices instead of standing against it," the NGT bench said.

Justice Sheo Kumar Singh added, "It is surprising that the Notification of 1991 and several orders of Hon'ble the High Court and Hon'ble the Supreme Court had not been complied with and the CRZ Notification has not been acted upon till date due to various reasons. The pendency of the appeals can never be made a ground for non-compliance of the order and the tendency to adjourn the appeal is taken by the litigants. In the present appeal, the appellant has also requested some time."

The parties were given additional time to file their replies and transferred the matter to the principal bench.