Home Supporting structure Pre-1991 structure does not make new building in CRZ legal: NGT | Goa News

Pre-1991 structure does not make new building in CRZ legal: NGT | Goa News

Panaji: The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has upheld an order by the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) ordering the demolition of an illegally constructed restaurant and apartments at Waddy in Candolim.
The court said it was unwilling to accept the offender’s argument supporting the constructions because a structure existed at the location before 1991.
The offender had appealed the GCZMA demolition order to the NGT.
“It is clear that the disputed property is within CRZ-III between 200m and 500m (from the high tide line), which required GCZMA permission for any type of development, which does not was not done in this case. Instead, the caller attempted to advance the argument that the structure predated 1991. Therefore, the CRZ notification would not be applicable. We are not ready to accept this argument,” the court said.
“It is also evident that all on-site inspections were conducted in the presence of the parties and it is also evident that all proceedings held by GCZMA were conducted in the presence of the Appellant. Therefore, it cannot be said that ‘He was not given an adequate opportunity to defend himself,’ the court said.
The NGT cited High Court orders which had stated that the CRZ notification issued under the Environmental Protection Act was intended to protect the environment and promote sustainable development. It is the law of the land, which must be respected and applied. The court also cited the Supreme Court, stating that construction in violation of CRZ regulations should not be taken lightly.
“We are of the view that as the disputed area is covered by the CRZ Notice, 2011, no construction could have been done by the Appellant without the prior permission of the GCZMA and therefore we find no infirmity in the mis en cause (GCZMA) order which stands to be affirmed and is therefore affirmed and this appeal stands to be dismissed and is therefore dismissed,” the court said.
The GCZMA order found that the offender had constructed a ground-plus-two structure with a FAR greater than 33%, without any authorization from GCZMA and other authorities.