AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE 159th MEETING OF THE GOA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY (GCZMA) TO BE HELD ON 10/10/2017 (TUESDAY) AT 3:30 P.M. IN THE CONFERENCE HALL, 2ND FLOOR, SECRETARIAT, PORVORIM – GOA.

Item No.1: To confirm the minutes of the 157th GCZMA Meeting held on 19/09/2017 and 158th meeting held on 26/09/2017.

The members may kindly give their comments / suggestions, if any and the same may be confirmed.

Item No. 2:

Case No. 2.1:

NOC for construction of Flood protection wall, near Vanxim Church, Capao, V.P, St. Mathias, Tiswadi, North Goa by Water Resources Department.

Background: The project proponent has requested for NOC for construction of Flood protection wall, near Vanxim Church, Capao, V.P, St. Mathias, Tiswadi – Goa.

Site Inspection Report: The site was inspected by Shri. Suhas Godse and Shri. Shrirang Jambhale, Expert members of the GCZMA. The observations recorded are as follows: 1. The proposed site for construction of flood-protection wall is on the bank of river Mandovi (tributary). 2. The site is used for docking canoes. 3. There are remnants of dilapidated retaining wall of lateritic stones. 4. On either side of the site mangrove plants are abundant, whereas, at the site there is no growth of mangrove . 5. On the landward-side from the site are a number of houses belonging to residents of Fisherman community. 6. The residents reported that due to collapse of the earlier retaining wall the river water reaches up to their door steps endangering life and property.

Recommendation:

1. For protection of the life and property of the residents it is necessary to construct the flood-protection wall. 2. The Authority may permit WRD to construction of the flood-protection wall. 3. Due care should be taken to not to allow cement and other construction debris to be left at the site. 4. The mangrove on either side of the site should not be disturbed in any way and should be duly protected. 5. Certificate of clearing of the construction debris from the site should be provided by WRD, which will be verified by the Authority.

The Authority may deliberate and decide.

Page 1 of 40

Case No.: 3.3: NOC/Permission for proposed re-development of Cargo Berths at Mormugao Port on PPP basis by Mormugao Port Trust (MPT)

Background: The GCZMA is in receipt of an Application dated 23/08/2017 from the Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) for proposed re-development of Cargo Berths at Mormugao Port on PPP basis. The MPT has submitted the EIA study report for re-development of Berth 8, 9 & Barge Berth at MPT, Goa.

The site inspection report will be circulated during the meeting.

The said matter was placed in the 157th GCZMA meeting held on 19/09/2017 wherein the Representatives present on behalf of the Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) made a detailed presentation. after detailed discussion and due deliberation and in view of the detailed presentation made by the representatives of MPT, the Expert members sought time to examine the EIA report, study report of the NIO and submit their comments with respect to the EIA studies carried out so also, on the submissions made by the MPT. As such the Authority decided to take up the matter thereafter.

In view of the above, the representatives of MPT are requested to remain present for the meeting for further discussion and decision in the matter.

Case No.: 2.3: CRZ Clearance /Permission for proposed deepening of approach Channel and Inner Basin for Capesize Vessels at Port of Mormugao Port submitted by the Mormugao Port Trust (MPT)

Background: The project proposal is received from the Chief Engineer, Mormugao Port Trust, Government of Goa, Headland - Sada - Goa vide letter bearing No. CE/PC-50/2017/3026 dated 02/08/2017 seeking approval / clearance of the GCZMA for proposed deepening of approach Channel and Inner Basin for Capesize Vessels at Port of Mormugao Taluka. The MPT has submitted the EIA study report for Capital deepening of Navigation Channel at Mormugao Port for Capesize Vessels.

 It is pertinent to note that the GCZMA was earlier in receipt of the said proposal wherein upon receipt of the said proposal site inspection was conducted by the then Expert member of the GCZMA on 22/07/2015.  Site inspection report submitted by Dr. Antonio Mascarenhas, then Expert member is as follows:

A site inspection was conducted on 22 July 2015 at Mormugao Harbour and along the sea front / cliff adjoining the MPT building. The purpose was to get some basic inputs about

Page 2 of 40 major projects that the MPT has planned. Engineers from MPT explained about the project they intend to undertake.

Since the work mostly involves considerable modification of the seabed morphology and bathymetry, the work envisaged is a comprehensive one. The following topics need to be considered:

1. The MPT proposes to deepen the existing navigation channel to allow larger ships into the port area. The present shipping channel is about 6 km long and the width is 250 metres. Presently, the water depth within the channel ranges between 14.1 and 14.4 at the inner and outer points respectively.

2. According to the proposed project, the navigation channel will be dredged and deepened to 19.5 – 19.8 meters over the entire distance of over 6 km.

3. The EIA is conducted by WAPCOS Limited; a draft report is presented. It is not known whether there is a subsequent final report.

4. Data on echo-sounding is the basic need for a project of this kind. A comprehensive map depicting the bathymetric configuration of the mouth of the estuary, including the shipping channel, is imperative.

5. Analyses of sea bed profiling are conducted by Geo Star surveys. Moreover, the results of the geophysical work are not presented, either in the EIA or separately, to the GCZMA. Shallow seismic profiles could throw light on the nature of sediment and its thickness along the channel.

6. Seismic studies in the port area were conducted by NIO about 15 years ago; these results could have referred to by the EIA consultants.

7. The Mormugao port is in operation for nearly a century. An analysis of the changes in the depth profiles over time would be welcome in view of the eventual deepening of the shipping channel. For this reason, the EIA could have included at least a few cross sectional depth profiles perpendicular to the approach channel for a better understanding of the sea floor morphology of the shipping lane.

8. Similarly, the data on bore holes is not presented. The exact rock types, the geochemical and mineralogical composition of basement rocks (that will be encountered while dredging) are not discussed. It is also not clear whether these are sediment piston cores or longer drill cores.

9. According to the EIA, the sediments analysed are found to be free of any contamination. This issue may need a review since it is known that estuaries of Goa are indeed contaminated with heavy metals which are bound to be incorporated in the sea floor sediments. The NIO or GSPCB may provide further details.

Page 3 of 40

10. As calculated in the EIA, total 15 Mm3 of sediment is expected to be removed. This material will be dumped in the deep sea, and hence lost forever. It would be worthwhile to examine if this dredged sediment which is essentially sandy could be used for: (a) beach nourishment considering that some of our beaches are losing sand, and (b) inland building projects considering that river sand is in short supply.

11. The depth of 19 m will be attained at a distance of 10 km away from the estuary; the total length of the channel will thus be 10 km at least, from the existing wave breaker. The dredge spoils are to be released beyond 10 km distance based on recommendations of sediment dispersion by CWPRS. The methodology and the interpretations based on which this conclusion is arrived at, is not explained in the EIA report.

12. A cause for concern is the dredging / cutting of basement rock. A significant volume of 125.000 m3 of rock is to be dredged, just 250 metres away from the rocky shoreline. As a result, the stability of the sea cliff / headland may be at stake. Although this statement may be dismissed as „speculation‟, it may be worth noting, due to the fact that the sea-facing laterite sea cliffs are highly vulnerable to collapse.

13. A similar apprehension arises with regard to the proposed 19.8 m deep channel. Consider a depth profile through the axis of the river from the Zuari Bridge to the outer anchorage. It is found that the river bed is the shallowest (1.5 m water depth) at about 1 km downstream of the bridge; from this point seaward, the water depth increases gradually to 8 – 10 m (inner anchorage), and 12 – 14 m (outer anchorage). This is where the present 14.4 m deep channel is also found (see NHO chart of 2007). The navigation channel is now sought to be deepened to 19.8 m, an increase of 5 metres in just one attempt. It is precisely this sudden increase in the channel depth that may induce drastic morphological changes within the estuary. It appears highly plausible that large quantities of riverine / estuarine sediments might be flushed out of the estuary through the newly created deeper channel. In such an eventuality, the geomorphological configuration of the entire estuary in general and the river banks in particular will be rendered unstable.

14. On page 3-6, section 3.8 of WAPCOS report mentions about reclamation needed “to meet the necessary back up area requirement”. This aspect is not understood and needs to be clarified as the area constitutes the toe of the headland that is subjected to erosion due to direct wave attack, particularly during monsoon. In summary, the Zuari river is a part of a major estuarine complex along the west coast of India. Since the dredging of the navigation channel is a large magnitude project that involves a significant invasion into an otherwise stable estuarine seabed, drastic environmental impacts could result. Sections 12 and 13 above and which the EIA has not discussed, may need to be evaluated. Therefore, it would be advisable (and it is also strongly recommended) to get the present EIA reviewed by another national ocean research organization of repute, so as to get a second opinion about the possible environmental implications which the EIA might have overlooked.

Page 4 of 40

 Further, the said matter was placed in the 120th GCZMA meeting held on 11/09/2015 wherein the Authority upon perusal of the site inspection report dated 22/07/2015 prepared by Dr. Antonio Mascarenhas, Expert Member (GCZMA) noted that there is a need to carry out proper and detailed studies with regard to the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) for the said project proposed by the MPT. The Authority after detailed discussion and due deliberation and by taking in to consideration the abovementioned points, decided to defer the said matter and direct the Mormugao Port Trust, Sada, Vasco make a detailed presentation before the Authority in respect of entire project proposal and observations raised by the Expert member of the GCZMA.  Thereafter, the matter was again placed in the 122nd GCZMA meeting held on 23/11/2017 wherein the Chairman, MPT along with the officials of the MPT and WAPCOS Ltd. made the detailed technical presentation before the Authority.  The Authority noted that the proposal involves capital dredging and the said activity is listed at Sr. No. 7(e) in the schedule of EIA Notification, 2006 as category ‘A’ project. As such the proposed project activity requires prior environmental clearance under the EIA Notification, 2006 and CRZ Clearance under the CRZ Notification, 2011 from the Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change, Government of India.  The Authority noted that the proposal of capital dredging and its possible impact is multidisciplinary activity which involves various fields of science and that the Authority does not have a technical and scientific competence to appraise the said proposal thoroughly. After detailed deliberation and discussion and on the basis of the mandatory documents enclosed with the application decided to forward the proposal to the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Government of India for its decision on grant of Environmental Clearance and CRZ clearance. The Authority also decided to refer the comments of the Authority / Expert Members to the MoEF & CL for its consideration.  MoEF granted EC dated 09/02/2016.  Subsequently, Appeal bearing No. 10/2016 was filed before the Hon’ble NGT by Old Cross Fishing Canoe Owners Co-op Society Ltd and Baina Ramponkar & Fishing Canoe Owners Society interlia challenging the Environmental clearance granted by the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MOEF & CC), Government of India to Mormugao Port Trust vide clearance dated 9/2/2016 for a project of deepening of approach channel for capsize vessels at Mormugao Port.  The Hon’ble Tribunal vide order dated 4/5/2016 was pleased to pass detailed directions contained in Para 24 (I) to (4) of the said order. As per the said order a Committee was constituted comprising Dr. Antanio Mascarenhas, the then Expert Member of GCZMA, one Marine Biologist/water quality specialist from NIO Goa; the Deputy Collector of the area and Senior officer of Goa Pollution Control Board, at para-2, directed to inspect and carry out physical inspection for

Page 5 of 40

ascertainment of environmental status and impact due to dredging operations. The Committee was to visit the dredging site and also any other affected area within three (3) days of the order and at least, once in a fortnight subsequently and the Committee was directed to submit its report to the Registry of the Tribunal directly time to time. The Committee was also provided with necessary logistics, infrastructures and other support by the Respondent No.1, Mormugao Port Trust (MPT). Pursuant to the above order, the GCZMA vide letter dated 5/5/2016 communicated the said order to all the concerned authorities. The Mormugao Port Trust was also directed to give 50 Cr. bank guarantee to the GCZMA which was duly complied.  The site in question was visited by the Expert Committee constituted by NGT, Pune on 26/5/2016. The joint site inspection report dated 27/5/2016 was prepared by the members of the committee and filed before the Hon’ble Tribunal. The Hon’ble Tribunal vide 11/7/2016 order highlighted certain observations made by the Expert Committee and decided to examine and hear the matter expeditiously.  After hearing all the parties vide order dated 02/9/2016 the Hon’ble Tribunal interalia decided to quash and set aside the Environment Clearance dated 9/2/2016 granted to MPT and remanded the matter back to MOEF for further consideration and further directed the MPT to submit bank guarantee of 50 Cr. to the GCZMA. The Hon’ble Tribunal further kept the matter for further hearing on restitution and restoration of environment.  The Hon’ble Tribunal vide order dated 23/11/2016 interalia directed and observed as under: - “We have perused our Order dated 5thOctober, 2016 which is explicit in its expression that this Tribunal being of the opinion that cause of damage consequent to dredging operation needs study at the earliest and the Committee must discharge its conferred function at the earliest. While expressing such opinion, this Tribunal took notice of the fact that the nature dynamic of the environment is now congenial for the study to continue and therefore, permitted the Committee appointed by this Tribunal vide Order dated 4th May, 2016 to carry out follow-up study which gives details of benthic diversity, beach erosion and submarine morphology. We believe the Committee has assumed office and is now active in discharge of the conferred responsibility.  The Committee after conducting site inspection on 06/12/2016 submitted a report dated 7/12/2016 in terms of observations in the order dated 23/11/2016.  The MPT also earlier vide letter dated 2/12/2016 has submitted following documents:- a) A status of work, b) brief note on legal status, c) bathymetric charts of the project area and spoil ground updated in OCT-NOV 2016.

Page 6 of 40

The Hon’ble Tribunal vide order dated 9/12/2016 interalia observed as under: - “He submits that in terms of the directions of this Tribunal a Committee has conducted study which gives details of benthic diversity, beach erosion and submarine morphology, but as regards marine biodiversity is concerned study cannot be taken up as NIO who has taken this assignment is not present in Goa. They have taken time to file separate report in this regard earlier in the month of January, 2017”.

The Hon’ble Tribunal vide order dated 9/2/2017 while referring to report dated 19/1/2017 noted certain recommendation made therein and observed as under: - “From the recommendations made therein, there is a reason to believe that the study till this date is not sufficient to give clear answers to the question of erosion caused due to chronic sand loss as to whether the same is caused by deepening of channel or human interference or natural processes, or all three. We, therefore, direct that the study be continued further so as to find answers to this material question”.

 The Hon’ble Tribunal vide order dated 16 /3/2017 interlia recorded the following :-“issue of restoration of the seabed which suffered adverse environmental impacts due to dredging was one of the question in the main application. A Committee was, therefore, appointed to ascertain environmental status and impacts due to dredging operations vide Order dated 4thMay, 2016. GCZMA was to act as coordinator for the said Committee. The Committee made certain recommendations as major mitigation measures from the biological perspective. Further the Committee opined that the study carried out was not sufficient to give clear answer to the question of erosion caused due to chronic sand loss as to whether the same is caused by deepening of channel or human interference or natural processes, or all three. We, therefore, directed study to be continued further so as to get clear answer to the material question. Today learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the GCZMA submits that Dr. Antanio Mascaranes, the then Member, GCZMA and one of the members of the said Committee, has expressed that the Committee is not a research committee but was only meant to give input about the likely impacts of the capital dredging and to answer the questions posed; and the NGT has ordered further study and therefore, the study of geological and biological may be allowed to be carried out by separate one or two different reputed marine organizations. Before we pass any further orders, we will like to hear the Member Secretary, GCZMA and Dr. Antanio Mascaranes, Member of the Committee appointed by us. We, therefore, direct Member

Page 7 of 40

Secretary and Dr.Antanio Mascaranes to remain present before us on the next date. GCZMA shall bear their travel and incidental expenses”.  In compliance to the order of the Hon’ble NGT, both Dr. A. Mascarenhas and Member Secretary GCZMA remained present for hearing on 30/3/2017 before the Hon’ble tribunal and the The Hon’ble tribunal vide order dated 30/3/2017 observed as under :- “We have apprised both of them of the outcome of the earlier studies which point out that the erosion has been caused due to chronic sand loss as a result of deepening of channel or human interference or natural processes, or all three. We, therefore, asked for the interim measures to arrest sand loss which can be put in place taking into consideration all three to be the causes therefore and to continue further study to reach the final conclusions in that regard Mr. Agnelo Fernandes, Member Secretary, GCZMA and Expert Member Dr. Agnelo Fernandes submit that the solution to the present problem can be arrived at after due deliberation on all the issues. They seek time for such deliberation. Time is granted”.  The matter was placed in the 146th GCZMA meeting held on 11/04/2017 wherein the Authority perused the Agenda note and also perused the Order dated 30/3/2017 and after detailed discussion and due deliberation decided to issue a request letter to Central Water And Power Research Station (CWPRS), Pune and NCSCM, Chennai in order to submit a detailed proposal to conduct a study whether there is any impact / erosion to the shoreline due to the Capital dredging activities carried out by the MPT in terms of the Orders passed by the Hon’ble NGT in Appeal No. 10/2016.  Thereafter, the matter was again placed in the 148th GCZMA meeting wherein Dr. Antonio Mascarenhas, former Scientist, NIO and then Expert Member, GCZMA who was present during the meeting explained that he had conducted two inspections pursuant to the order issued by the Hon’ble NGT i.e on 6th December, 2016 and 19th January, 2017. He explained the member that he has also perused the multi dated Google Earth ( GE) satellite images of the period 2002-2016 for ascertaining the shoreline changes and Naval Charts 1970 and 2007 and his observations are as follows: i. The Google Earth (GE) satellite images indicate that sand is found only on the eastern half of the coastal strip at Khariwada and western part is in grip of chronic erosion. Further there are habitations in the western part which have dramatically increased over the last decade and some of this structures have invaded the beach and its well known that human interference on sandy coastal areas leads to damage

Page 8 of 40

of dunes / backshore leading the sand starvation and in turn causes a disequilibrium of coastal process. ii. It is also possible that since berth no. 11 was constructed in 1990’s and the area is deepened to 13 meters and the impact is that the beach sand got drained into the channel and this process may be ongoing leading to prolonged beach erosion and the elders in Vasco city clearly recollect that normal beach existed all along the 1 kilometre long coast and this beach vanished over time. iii. The Naval charts of 1970 and 2007 reveal that the depth of contours appears to have changed significantly / drastically over period of time and this aspect needs to be studied in detail. iv. During the inspection the MPT has presented two reports of the National Institute of Oceanography both commissioned by MPT and the 1st report which is preliminary report however the report pertains to some beach profile are measured on beaches located some 25 Kilometers away from the MPT harbour and the data appears to be irrelevant as far as impacts of dredging in the harbour are concerned. v. The second interim report deals with the biological aspects of the sediments of the Zuari estuary, however it is noted that the sampling is scattered and it not done along the axis of the channel which is more than 10 kilometres long and the same would be required to be reviewed.  Dr. Antonio Mascarenhas expressed that in such circumstances a detailed follow up study would be required to ascertain the a) Benthic Diversity, b) Beach erosion and c) Submarine morphology.  It may be noted that two reports were submitted to the GCZMA: (1) Deepening of approach channel for Cape size vessels at Mormugao port: impacts due to dredging of navigation channel, by Antonio Mascarenhas and Baban Ingole, dated 19 January 2017 and (2)Deepening of approach channel for Cape size vessels at Mormugao port: beach erosion at Khariwado, by Antonio Mascarenhas, dated 19 April 2017.  The members deliberated and discussed and decided to constitute sub committee comprising of Dr. Mascarenhas, Dr. P. V Shirodkar, Shri. Suhas Godse and Dr. Nandkumar Sawant to discuss the issue in detail with the scientist of NIO who have carried out the studies on behalf of the MPT within a week and then decide the further course of action to carry out follow up study on a) Benthic Diversity b) Beach erosion and c) Submarine morophology.  There was a meeting held on 01/08/2017 of the sub-committee members to discuss on the matter.  Thereafter, the Hon’ble NGT vide Order dated 28/07/2017 has given following directions:

Page 9 of 40

1. Respondent No.1 shall not carry out any capital dredging except as provided in the Order dated 2nd September, 2016.

2. Permission to carry out maintenance dredging for keeping the navigational channel as described in paragraph No.17 of the reply and quoted hereinabove is granted subject to the Respondent No.1. The Mormugao Port Trust keeping the Sub Committee informed of its action in respect of maintenance dredging activity in the Port well in advance from time to time.

3. Sub-Committee constituted by the GCZMA in its 148th Meeting held on 3rd May, 2017 shall monitor the maintenance dredging activity of the Respondent No.1. The Mormugao Port Trust and shall bring to the notice of this Tribunal anything which is in their opinion dangerous to the environment and/or beyond the scope of maintenance dredging  Subsequently, the GCZMA was in receipt of a letter from MPT addressed to the Sub-Committee members stating that thejy will commence maintainence dredging on 07/09/2017 and the same shall be completed within 45 days.  Further, the GCZMA was in receipt of complaint / representation alleging that the MPT has violated the Order dated 28/07/2017.  Also, a Writ Petition bearing Stamp No. 2966/2017 was filed before the Hon’ble High court of Bombay at Goa by Old Cross fishing Canoe V/s. Board of Trustees MPT seeking reliefs of implementations of Order dated 28/07/2017 passed by the Hon’ble NGT, Pune. The said matter came up for hearing on 13/09/2017 and the Hon’ble High Court sought status report from the GCZMA.  Subsequently, inorder to ascertain the dredging work done by MPT, the Sub – Committee carried out site inspection on 12/09/2017. Subsequently, there was a meeting held on 14/09/2017 in the Member Secretary’s Chamber with regard to monitoring done by the GCZMA sub –committee of the maintenance dredging done by the MPT. Thhe Sun- Committee submitted its report dated 14/09/2017 interalia giving various recommendations which are as follows: i) The dredging started by MPT since 07/09/2017 in the approach channel is near berth Nos. 10 and 11 and falls in the last segment of the channel. ii) The ongoing dredging is a maintenance dredging by MPT to achieve the normally required draft of -14.1m. iii) The permission for this ongoing maintenance dredging has already been granted by the H’ble NGT, Pune (Order dated 28/07/2017). iv) On 14/09/2017 the MPT submitted the bathymetric charts of the channel near berth Nos. 5 and 6, within the first turning circle and near berth Nos. 10 and 11

Page 10 of 40

to GCZMA Office. The charts indicate that only at berth Nos. 10 and 11, the existing draft is –11 to -13m which needs to be dredged further to achieve a draft of -14.1m. v) Besides this, there is no need for MPT to continue dredging further in the channel as once the draft of -14.1m is achieved in the last segment of the inner channel, the dredging will be stopped. vi) So, the present situation is that the NGT has permitted MPT for carrying out maintenance dredging, and also, the MPT is claiming that the dredging going on is the maintenance dredging as permitted by NGT.

Under the circumstances therefore, the committee decided the following; i) MPT to provide pre-dredging survey / bathymetric maps of the entire approach channel along side berths and turning circles. ii) MPT also to provide bathymetry charts along with fortnightly reports to GCZMA. iii) Areas/segments in the navigation channel where maintenance dredging up to a depth of 14.4 m and 14.1m is required/not required may be indicated and relevant maps may be submitted to GCZMA as early as possible. iv) Maintenance dredging may continue till the channel shows desired depths of not more than 14.4m.

After the maintenance dredging is over, the MPT should submit the following to the Office of GCZMA, with an intimation/copies to the Sub-Committee members;

a) A final Report about the maintenance dredging activity of 45 days. b) The methodology followed during dredging. c) The bathymetry charts showing spot depths along the entire channel. v) To confirm the final depths after the maintenance dredging is over, the GCZMA may appoint an independent Chartered Hydrographer, at the cost of MPT, who can provide the actual bathymetry all along the channel. vi) If it is found that the bathymetry is more then -14.1m and 14.4m at the respective segments of the channel, it would tantamount to a violation of the NGT Order.

The said report dated 14/09/2017 has been forwarded to the Chief Engineer, MPT for effective implementation of the said report as well as the Order dated 28/07/2017.

Page 11 of 40

The detailed report prepared by the Sub-Committee will be circulated during the meeting.

 The GCZMA is also in receipt of two pre-dredge bathymetry charts from the MPT vide letter dated 14/09/2017.  Further to the judgement of the Hon’ble National Green Tribunal, Pune striking down the Environmental Clearance issued by the Ministry of Enviroment Forest and Climate change, MPT challenged the said order before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.  The Hon’ble Suprement Court directed a Public Hearing should be held for the proposed project. Accordingly a Public Hearing was conducted by the Goa State Pollution Control Board and thereafter this fact was brought to the notice of the Hon;ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has now disposed the application of MPT in view of the fact that Public Hearing has been conducted and the matter is before the Expert Appraisal Committee of the Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change.  The MPT has engaged the services of the National Institute of Oceanography for carrying out the monitoring studies and the report of the NIO will be presented during the meeting.

The said matter was placed in the 157th GCZMA meeting held on 19/09/2017 wherein the Representatives present on behalf of the Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) made a detailed presentation.

After the presentation made by the representatives of the MPT, the Expert members raised certain points / queries with respect to the proposed project on Capital Dredging at the Approach Channel which are as follows:

a) Whether the Capital Dredging will have any impact on the Erosion at Khariwada. b) Since the Approach Channel is being dredged to another -5 m or more, whether it will have any effect on the Aquifer in the bottom strata. c) The Spoil Ground site identified for disposal of dredged material by CWPRS is located at 14 km away from the dredging site. Based on modeling studies, they have located the point at 24 depth. It is also mentioned in the report that if the point is fixed at 23 m depth then the plume after dispersion is entering into the estuary mouth. When the point is fixed at 24m depth, it is moving northwards as the currents are northwards.

The Authority after detailed discussion and due deliberation and in view of the queries raised by the Expert members decided to forward the queries to the project proponent i.e. and seek clarification / reply and thereafter to place the reply before the Authority in its next meeting.

Page 12 of 40

Accordingly, queries / clarifications were forwarded by the Expert members to the MPT and the reply for the same has also been received by the GCZMA. The said reply is annexed herewith as Annexure II.

In view of the above, the representatives of MPT has been requested to remain present for the meeting for further discussion and decision in the matter.

Item No. 3:

Case No. 3.1

NOC/Permission for proposed construction of new KCL Storage unit in the land bearing Sy. No. 163 of Sancoale Village, Mormugao Taluka by Zuari Agro Chemicals Limited

Background: The project proponent desire to construct a new KCL Storage unit in the land bearing Sy. No. 163 of Sancoale Village, Mormugao – Goa. The name of Zuari Industries Ltd. is reflected in the Form I & XIV.

It may be noted that the said Application was earlier received in the year 2014 wherein the site was inspected by Shri. Ragunath Dhume, the then Expert member of the GCZMA on 15/07/2014. the said inspection carried out was with respect to 2 projetcs i.e. construction of new KCL Storage unit and construction of new atmospheric ammonia storage tank in the land bearing Sy. No. 163 of Sancoale Village, Mormugao – Goa.

Site Inspection: The site inspection report indicates that the proposed site is between 200 – 500 mts. from the HTL. There exists Industrial units within the plot. The tanks will be used to store chemicals which are non hazardous in nature. The proposed structures are within the campus of Zuari Agro Chemicals Ltd.

The Authority may deliberate and decide.

Case No. 3.2 NOC for reconstruction of house bearing No. K - 24/B in the property bearing Survey No. 94/13 of Reis Magos Village, Bardez Taluka by Mr. Charanjeet Sidhu.

Background: The Applicant has sought permission / NOC to carry out reconstruction of house bearing No. K - 24/B in the property bearing Survey No. 94/13 of Reis Magos Village, Bardez – Goa. The applicant has submitted following documents:  a deed of sale between Mrs. Sofia Bhimji & Anr. (referred to as the Vendor) and Mr. Harbanssingh Siddhu (referred to as the Purchaser), deed of sale between Mr. Felicio Inacio Rodrigues (referred to as the Vendor) and Mr. Harbanssingh Siddhu (referred to as the Purchaser).  a copy of Occupancy certificate bearing No. VP/RM/743/9192 dated 20/02/1992 of the Village Panchayat of Reis Magos issued to Mr. Felicio Inacio Rodrigues for reconstruction of building bearing No. K - 24/B situated in Sy. No. 94/13 of Reis Magos

Page 13 of 40

 a copy of NOC dated 23/03/2010 of the Village Panchayat of Reis Magos issued to Mr. Harbassingh Siddhu for internal repairs to the existing structures situated in Sy. No. 94/13  a copy of Order of NGPDA bearing No. NGPDA/RM/18/1128/1991 dated 09/07/1991 issued to Mr. Felicio Inacio Rodrigues for regularization of existing rooms in Sy. No. 94/13.  Form I & XIV indicating the name of the applicant’s father’s name. Thereafter, the site was inspected by Shri. Raghunath Dhume, then Expert Member (GCZMA) on 07/03/2016. Further, the said matter was taken up in the 126th GCZMA meeting held on 29/03/2016 wherein after detailed discussion and due deliberations and on considering the report of the site inspection conducted by Shri. Raghunath Dhume, Expert Member (GCZMA) dated 07/03/2016, the Authority decided to approve the said proposal for repair of house bearing No. K - 24/B in the property bearing Survey No. 94/13 of Reis Magos Village, Bardez - Goa in terms of the CRZ Notification 2011, as amended.

Accordingly, the NOC was issued for repairs. The applicant has now requested for reconstruction of the said house, in view f the application for reconstruction the site was re- inspected by the Expert members of the GCZMA.

Site Inspection Report: The site was inspected by Dr. Prabhakar Shirodkar and Shri. Audhoot Bhonsule, Expert members of the GCZMA. The observations recorded are as follows: i) The site is a plot of land with 6720 sq.m. (Sy. No. 94/13) and is lying towards the riverside of Mandovi River at Reis Magos. ii) The plot is starting from the bank of river by the side of Verem-Reis Magos main road. iii) Form I & XIV submitted shows the name of Mr. Harbansing G. Siddu as the owner of the plot. iv) The applicant Mr. Charanjeet Sing Siddhu is the son of Mr. Harbansing Siddhu as per the General Power of Attorney document. v) The applicant has proposed to reconstruct the existing villas in his property at Reis Magos. vi) The said villas at site are within 100m from the bank of River Mandovi, and are within the NDZ area however, the said villas were constructed prior to 1991 and the approved plans etc indicate that they were prior to 1991. vii) Being old construction close to the river, the Villas need maintenance, so the applicant applied to GCZMA on 29/2/2016 for repair and renovation of the villas and also got the GCZMA permission dated 22/3/2017 for the same. viii) However, thereafter the applicant decided to reconstruct the villas and so put up another application dated 05/06/2017 for reconstruction of the said villas with a reconstruction plan. ix) The plan submitted shows the plot area as 6720 sq.m., effective plot area as 5898.78 sq.m. after leaving for road widening, etc, plot coverage of 7.12% and an FAR of 13.42%. x) The existing structures are also G+1 structures in dilapidated condition and needs repair.

Page 14 of 40

Conclusion and Observation

i) The proposed reconstruction of villas by Mr. Charajeet Sing Siddhu is within the NDZ of Mandovi River at Reis Magos village. ii) The structure were constructed prior to 1991 and were in operation. iii) On 29/2/2016, the proponent had applied for repair and renovation of the said villas and also obtained the NOC from GCZMA for the same dated 22/3/2017. iv) The plan submitted shows that the reconstruction is on the existing plinth without increasing the FAR. v) As per the CRZ Regulation, the reconstruction of structure within the NDZ is permissible provided the existing structure is old and prior to 1991 and is on the same plinth without increasing the FAR. vi) As per the plan submitted by Mr. Charanjeet Sing Siddhu, the reconstruction is on the same plinth without increasing the FAR. vii) So, the Authority may deliberate for a decision on NOC for the same.

Accordingly, in view of the above, the matter is placed for discussion and decision in the matter.

Case No. 3.3 NOC for reconstruction of house bearing No. 109 located in the property bearing Survey No. 77/1 (Part) of Verem, Reis Magos Village, Bardez Taluka by Mrs. Annapurna Naik.

Background: The Applicant has sought permission / NOC to carry out reconstruction of house bearing No. 109 located in the property bearing Survey No. 77/1 (Part) of Verem, Reis Magos Village, Bardez – Goa. The applicant has submitted following documents:  Certificate of Purchase dated 25/04/2016 issued by the Deputy Collector &S.D>O, Bardez.  DSLR Survey Plan  Order dated 08/03/2017 passed by the Hon’ble Court of Senior Civil Judge ‘C’ Court at Mapusa permitting the defendants (Mrs. Annapurna Naik one of the defendant) to reconstruct their existing dwelling house after obtaining permission from the Vnillage Panchayat and other concerned authorities and in terms of the building bye laws.  Form I & XIV wherein the name of the applicant is reflected alongwiht other owners. Site Inspection Report: The site was inspected by Dr. Prabhakar Shirodkar and Shri. Audhoot Bhonsule, Expert members of the GCZMA. The observations recorded during the meeting are as follows: i) The site is a plot of land having one old G+1 residential house (House - 1) plus another ground floor house (House -2) along with a hut within the compound wall and all are lying on the northern bank of Mandovi River along Betim-Verem main road. i) The existing structure is an old structure, existing prior to 1991 and is a Mundkarial house which the applicant got through Mundkarial rights in 2003, vide order of Joint Mamlatdar of Bardez, dated 13/01/2003. ii) The said house is falling within the NDZ area of Mandovi River along Verem side. iii) The applicant has proposed reconstruction of House -1 and the plan is put up which does not indicate the existing area occupied by House -1 in the statement.

Page 15 of 40

iv) The total area of the plot having both the houses (House - 1 & 2) plus the hut is 300 sq.m., whereas the reconstruction plan submitted indicates the alterations to the existing G+1 structure (House -1) which increases its floor area and the FAR.

Conclusion & Recommendation

i) The site where the reconstruction of the old residential house is proposed is lying within 100m from the HTL and is in NDZ area of Mandovi River. ii) Within this NDZ area, the reconstruction of old existing house is permissible only on the plinth of the existing structure. iii) The said old existing G+1 structure is having a smaller plinth and the applicant now wants to increase the plinth during reconstruction and the structure proposed is having an increased FAR of 78.07%. iv) Such a proposed reconstruction by increasing the plinth is not permissible within the NDZ area. v) So, the applicant may be requested to submit the revised plan indicating the exact area of the existing G+1 structure (House -1) within the site and the reconstruction plan showing structures without increasing the plinth area. vi) The Authority may deliberate for a decision on NOC for the said proposal after the satisfactory submission of the documents by the applicant.

Accordingly, in view of the above, the matter is placed for discussion and decision in the matter.

Case No. 3.4 Recommendation for proposed repair and renovation of Guest house bearing H. Nos. 387/1 and 388 located in the property bearing Sy. No. 34/3 of Colva Village, Salcete Taluka by Vinson’s Cottages.

Background: The applicant has sought permission / recommendation for proposed repair and renovation of Guest house bearing H. No. 387/1 and 388 located in the property bearing Sy. No. 34/3 of Colva Village, Salcete - Goa. The applicant has submitted following documents:

 a copy of NOC dated 11/11/2010 for Electrical Connection  a certificate dated 02/09/2010 for transfer of house & lighting tax of premises bearing No. 388 at 4th Ward, Colva issued by the Office of the Village Panchayat of Colva  copies of various house tax receipts with respect to House bearing H. No. 388 & also, H. No. 387/1.  a copy of Deed of Sale executed between Mr. Agostino Sequeira & Anr. (referred to as the Vendors) and Mr. Epifanio Verissimo Vincente Caetano Gracias & Anr (referred to as the Purchasers)

Page 16 of 40

 a copy of NOC dated 18/07/1990 issued by the Village Panchayat of Sernabatim, Vanelim, Colva & Gandaulim stating that there is no objection to register paying guest Units Lodge as “Gracias Quarters” at 4th Ward, Colva bearing H. No. 387/1, Salcetein name of Mr. Vincente Gracias.  a copy of NOC dated 21/05/2014 issued by the District Fire Station (South), Margao  a copy of Permission dated 01/06/2000 issued by the Village Panchayat for running Restaurant in the premises of Winson Cottages.  copies of House tax receipts and a copy of Permission issued by the Village Panchayat to The Nutan Mahila Mandel for staring the business to manufacture, sell food items for indoor & outdoor catering in the said premises  a copy of Certificate dated 16/05/1988 to start a manufacture of Aerated waters & sweet drinks at the said premises  a copy of Challan paid in the name of the Director of Industries & Mines, Panaji  a copy of Sanad dated 10/05/1988 issued by the O/o. S.D.O, Margao and a Sanad dated 12/02/2013 and 16/01/2014/.  Copies of Certificate of Registration issued by the Department of Tourism  a copy of Consent to Operate issued by the GSPCB.  A copy of Decree and Judgment in Regular Civil Suit No. 152/78/E of the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Margao.  Form I & XIV wherein the name of Mr. Epifanio Verissimo Vincente Caetano Gracias is reflected.

Site Inspection Report: The site was inspected by Shri. Ragunath Dhume a, Expert Members (GCZMA) on 15/04/2016. The inspection report prepared by Shri. Ragunath Dhume indicates that the adjoining properties has residential houses and Hotels. The existing land has Hotel & Guest House. There exists an access. The proposed plot is between 200 to 500 m from the HTL. There exists two structures within the plot. There are two houses for repairs and renovation. House bearing No. 387/1 is a G+1 structure and H. No. 388 is ground structure. The G+1 house is used as a Guest house and has documents and No objection certificate from the Village Panchayt for repairs of house from 1988 to 1989, however, no documents are shown to prove that the commercial activity is before 1991.

The Authority may deliberate and decide.

Page 17 of 40

Case No. 3.5

NOC/permission for reconstruction of existing house bearing H. No. 798 and landscaping in the property bearing Sy. No. 126/10, Plot “B”, Anjuna, Bardez Taluka by Mr. Amit Karla

Background: The applicant desire to carry out reconstruction of existing house bearing H. No. 798 and landscaping in the property bearing Sy. No. 126/10, Plot “B”, Anjuna, Bardez - Goa. The applicant has submitted copies of house tax receipts paid for the years 1983-84 to 1989-90, 1990-91 to 1991-92, 1994-95, 1995-96 and als,o submitted a copy of Deed of Sale between Mrs. Tanya Arora (refered to as ‘the Vendor’) and Mr. Amit Kalra & Anr. (refered to as ‘the Purchasers’). The applicant has also submitted an NOC dated 22/06/1992 issued by the Vilage Panchayat of Anjuna – Caisua to keep tourist paying guest.

Site Inspection Report: The site was inspected by Dr. Prabhakar Shirodkar and Shri. Audhut Bhounsule, Expert Members (GCZMA).

The observations recorded in the inspection report are as follows: i) The site is within 0-200m of CRZ III and is in the NDZ area of Anjuna village. ii) At site there is a plot with an area of 807 sq. m. which is compounded on all sides with a big gate towards its western side. iii) There exists a small house within the plot, with a ground floor structure having Mangalore tiles along with two smaller structures in its front side. iv) The existing house has a number 798 and it is having an area of 70 sq.m. v) The mention of this house number and the area is made in the order passed by the High Court in the inventory proceedings No. 148/1990 initiated by Mrs. Kamalavati Naik after the death of her husband Mr. Shankar Naik on 17/4/1977 to whom the whole property of 1425 sq.m. belonged. vi) After inventory proceedings, Mrs. Kamalavati divided the said property and gifted one part of 807 sq. m. land (Plot B) having a house with No. 798 to her son Mr. Arjun on 31/7/2008. vii) Thereafter Mr. Arjun sold the said plot in NDZ area to outsider, a non – Goan Mrs. Tanya Arora in Dec. 2012, who in turn sold the said plot to another non- Goan Mr. Amit Karla on 30th March 2015. viii) The receipts of the house tax paid to V.P. Anjuna-Caisua in respect of the said house and submitted to GCZMA office by the applicant shows that the house tax for the said house has been paid for the period 1983-84 and 1989 -1990. ix) Similarly, the copy of electricity bills attached also shows the payment of bills made by Mr. Arjun Shankar Govekar for the period from 1985-87. x) This shows that the said house is existing prior to 1991. xi) So also, the plan submitted by the applicant for reconstruction shows only the ground floor structure with 70 sq. m. area, FAR of 21.12% and coverage of 21.12%.

Conclusion and Recommendation

i) The house is an old house, existing prior to 1991 but is within the NDZ area.

Page 18 of 40

ii) So also, the plan submitted by the applicant for reconstruction shows only a ground floor structure within permissible limits of CRZ regulations. iii) As per CRZ Regulations, the reconstruction of house within NDZ area can be permitted on the existing plinth only if it is done by local community or a fishing community. iv) Considering the fact that the reconstruction of the said house in NDZ area is to be done by a non- Goan, who is not the local of the area but a resident of New Delhi, the Authority may deliberate whether to grant NOC or not for the said reconstruction. v) Thereafter the Authority may take a decision.

The said matter was placed in the 151st GCZMA meeting held on 15/06/2017 wherein the Authority after due deliberation and discussion and considering the site inspection report of the Expert members of the GCZMA, decided to forward the application for legal opinion in respect to the selling of plot to non-local persons. However, no legal opinion was sought in the matter as it was observed that earlier the Authority has already granted approvals / NOC’s / Permissions for such proposals received in respect of repair / renovation and reconstruction by the non-local persons.

The Authority may deliberate and decide.

Item No. 4: To discuss and decide on the Court matters and complaints pertaining to illegal construction in CRZ areas

Case No. 4.1: To discuss and decide on the complaints dated 24/05/2013, 29/11/2014 received from Mr. Agnel Judas Fernandes and also a complaint letter dated 22/04/2016 received from Mr. Laxman Phadke with regard to alleged illegal construction / extension of house comprising of Ground floor with RCC slab and first floor with metal sheets in the property bearing Sy. No. 25/3 of Village Penha de Franca carried out by Mr. Francis D’Souza and Mrs. Blanch D’Souza.

Brief Summary:  Complaints received from Mr. Agnel Judas Fernandes and Mr. Laxman Phadke with regard to alleged illegal construction /extension of house comprising of Ground floor with RCC slab and First floor with metal sheets being carried out by Mr. Francis D’Souza and his wife Mrs. Blanch D’Souza.  Matter was forwarded to the Inquiry Committee of the GCZMA for inquiry and report. Also, a Show Cause Notice Cum Stop Work Order and letters to the Village Panchayat of Penha de Franca and the Deputy Collector & S.D.O, Bardez for detailed report.  Inquiry Committee of the GCZMA submitted its report wherein it is recommneded that in absence of any license for construction of a structure G+1 in the No Development Zone obtained, GCZMA to issue a Show Cause Notice Cum Order of demolition / removal of the structure G+1 existing on the bank of river Mandovi and in Sy. No. 25/3 of Village Penha de Franca and restore the land to its original condition.

Page 19 of 40

 The said matter was placed in the 131st and 132nd GCZMA meetings held on 01/07/2016 and 06/07/2016 respectively wherein during both the meetings, the Respondents, Mr. Francis D’Souza and Mrs. Blanch D’Souza sought for adjournment and accordingly, the same was granted in the interest of justice. The said matter was placed before the Authority in the 132nd and 133rd GCZMA meetings held on 06/07/2016 and 20/07/2016 respectively for personal hearing however during both the meetings the Respondent Mrs. Blanch D’Souza and Mr. Francis D’Souza sought time.

The proceedings held of the personal hearing granted during 133rd GCZMA meeting are as follows:

Mrs. Blanch D’Souza and Mr. Francis D’Souza, the Respondents, were present alongwith their Advocate S. Adelkar. The Complainant, Mr. Agnel Judas Fernandes was present in person.

The Advocate for the Respondents raised a point that they were not provided with the copy of the complaint and the same is required / needed inorder to file their detailed reply and as such requested for time to file the reply.

The Authority after detailed discussion and due deliberation and on considering the request made by the Respondents, directed the Respondents, Mrs. Blanch D’Souza and Mr. Francis D’Souza to approach the Office of the GCZMA to collect the copy of the Complaint within 7 days time period and further directed the Respondents to file their reply within 2 weeks and thereafter the matter will be decided in the next meeting of the Authority which will be intimated to Respondents. The parties present agreed for the same. However, Mrs. Blanch D’Souza and Mr. Francis D’Souza did not approach the GCZMA Office to collect the complaint / documents required by them. As such the Office of the GCZMA vide letter dated 23/08/2016 furnished the copies of the documents as requested by Mrs. Blanch D’Souza and Mr. Francis D’Souza.

The said matter was placed in the 142nd GCZMA meeting held on 28/02/2017 wherein after detailed discussion and due deliberation and on considering the submissions made by the parties, the Authority decided to grant 7 days time period to the Respondent, Mrs. Blanch D’Souza to file her reply alongwith necessary documents in support of her case to the Office of the GCZMA and the matter will be taken up for final decision before the Authority thereafter. Further, the said matter was placed in the 147th GCZMA meetin g held on 18/04/2017 wherein the Authority upon perusal of the written reply aloongwith the documents filed by Mr. Francis D’Souza Mrs. Blanch D’Souza noted that the deed of sale dated 15/02/1992 on which the Respondent has relied upon has not been annexed to the reply though a statement is made in the reply that vide Deed of Sale dated 15/02/1992, Mrs. Olofina Isabela de Maina Lobo has sold the property together with the house to Late Mr. Anthony D’Souza, Father of Mr. Francis D’Souza.

After detailed discussion and due deliberation and in view of the above, the Authority decided to direct the Respondent to submit a copy of Deed of Sale dated 15/02/1992. The

Page 20 of 40

Authority also decided to issue a letter to the Village Panchayat, Penha de Franca inorder to verify the authenticity of the NOC dated 04/03/1986 issued by them to Mrs. Olofina Isabela de Maina Lobo.

In view of the above, the matter was placed before the Authority for grant of personal hearing to the parties.

Case No. 4.2: To discuss and decide on the report submitted by the Inquiry Committee with regard to the complaint filed by Goa Paryavaran Savrakshan Sangharsh Samitte pertaining to alleged illegal construction of buildings / structures within NDZ carried out by M/s. Thalasa Resort in the property bearing Sy. No. 214/1 of Anjuna Village, Bardez – Goa.

1. An Application bearing No. 106/2015 was filed by Goa Paryavaran Savrakshan Sangharsh Samittee before the Hon’ble NGT, Pune thereby challenging the alleged illegal construction of buildings / structures within NDZ area by M/s. Thalasa Resort in the property bearing Sy. no. 214/1 of Anjuna Village, Bardez – Goa. 2. The said Application came to be disposed off by the Hon’ble NGT, Pune with a common order dated 29/10/2015 with a direction to the Applicant to file proper complaint to the GCZMA and then GCZMA to take necessary action. 3. Accordingly, as directed by the Hon’ble NGT, Pune a complaint letter dated 30/10/2015 was filed by Goa Paryavaran Savrakshan Sangharsh Samittee with regard to the alleged illegal construction of buildings / structures within NDZ area at various beaches in the State of Goa viz. Anjuna, Vagator, Morjim, Mandrem etc. carried out by various Beach Resorts etc. 4. It may also be noted that, the GCZMA had received another complaint letter dated 23/11/2015 form Mr. Kashinath Shetye with regard to the same subject matter. 5. Accordingly, upon receipt of the said complaints the same were forwarded to the Inquiry Committee of the GCZMA for inquiry and report. 6. The Inquiry Committee of the GCZMA after conducting due inquiry which includes site inspection and grant of personal hearing to the parties, submitted their report on 10/06/2016. The Inquiry Committee report concludes as under: a) To remove all the temporary seasonal structures of M/s. Thalasa Resorts in Sy. No. 214/1 of Anjuna Village if they are existing after the end of the season May 2016 and b) Direct the Village Panchayat of Anjuna and the Tourism Department not to grant any permission for M/s. Thalasa Resorts for erection of temporary seasonal structures unless prior approval in accordance with CRZ Notification is obtained from GCZMA.

Page 21 of 40

7. The GCZMA is in receipt of additional complaint from Goa Paryavaran Savrakshan Sangharsh Samitee regarding demolition of unauthorized construction of buildings of M/s. Thalasa at Vagator Beach and Guest House at Anjuna beach situated in NDZ in Sy. No. 214/1 of Village Anjuna, Bardez – Goa.

In view of the above, the matter is placed before the Authority for grant of personal hearing to the parties and decision in the matter.

Case No. 4. 3:

To discuss and decide on the Complaint dated 09/03/2016 with regard ,to alleged illegal construction of structure and using the same for commercial purpose in the name of U. V. Bar & Restaurant situated in the property bearing Sy. No. 128, Anjuna, Bardez – Goa carried out by Mr. Sandeep Chimulkar

1. The GCZMA was in receipt of a complaint letter dated 09/03/2016 from Mr. Desmond Alvares, R/o. H. No. 470, with regard to alleged illegal construction of structure and using the same for commercial purpose in the name of U. V. Bar & Restaurant situated in the property bearing Sy. No. 128, Anjuna, Bardez – Goa carried out by Mr. Sandeep Chimulkar, R/o. H. No. 1110, Mazal Waddo, Anjuna, Bardez- Goa. 2. upon receipt of the said complaint, the GCZMA issued a Show Cause Notice dated 28/04/2016 to Mr. Sandeep Chimulkar, to which reply was filed by him on 09/05/2016 stating that there are many sub division of Survey No. 128 of Village Anjuna and he owns some of the sub divisions as such inorder to file proper and detailed reply to the Show Cause Notice it is necessary to specify the sub division number. 3. Accordingly, in view of the same, a letter was issued to the Complainant with a direction to provide the specific sub-division number of the property bearing Sy. No. 128 of Village Anjuna, Bardez – Goa pertaining to the illegal activity in question. 4. Further, the Complainant, Mr. Desmond Alvares vide letter dated 16/08/2016 informed that the U.V. Bar & Restaurant is situated in the property bearing Sy. No. 128/30, 32 and 35 of Village Anjuna, Bardez – Goa. 5. Upon receipt of the said letter, a Show Cause Notice Cum Stop Work Order dated 26/09/2016 was issued to Mr. Sandeep Chimulkar in respect of the property bearing Sy. No. 128/30, 32 and 35 of Village Anjuna, Bardez – Goa. A reply dated 17/10/2016 was received for the said Show Cause Notice Cum Stop Work Order. The reply in brief states as under: a) He is the owner in possession of the property bearing Sy. No. 128/35 of Village Anjuna, Bardez – Goa only. b) The property bearing Sy. No. 128/30 and 32 does not belong to him and it belongs to Pooja Chimulkar and Medha Chimulkar. c) The structure referred to in the Show Cause Notice has been existing in the property bearing Sy. No. 128/35 prior to 19/02/1991 i.e. before coming into force of the CRZ Notification.

Page 22 of 40

d) the structure in question is also reflected in the DSLR Survey Plan. e) Also, a letter has been issued by the Village Panchayat stating that as per the demand and collection register of House and Light tax, the house bearing No. 719/1 stands in the name of Mr. Sandeep Chimulkar from the year 1985-86. f) Also, the Village Panchayat of Anjuna vide letter dated 12/10/1990 has granted NOC to keep tourist paying guest which proves the existence of the structure in the property and also, that the said structure was used for commercial purposes even prior to coming into force of the CRZ Notification. g) The issue of the legality of the structure came up for consideration before the Panchayat and a Show Cause Notice was issued, which he had replied to. The issue came up for consideration in resolution No. 142/2008-2009 and in the said resolution upon consideration of the records of the Panchayat and the survey records it was resolved to withdraw the Show Cause Notice thereby endorsing the legality of the structure and the fact that it has been in existence prior to 1991. h) The structure in the said property was in existence and was used for commercial purpose prior to coming into force of the CRZ Notification and the complaint is baseless and frivolous.

In view of the above, the matter is placed for grant of personal hearing to the concerned parties.

Case No. 4. 4:

To discuss and decide on the complaint with regard to alleged illegal construction in the property bearing Sy. No. 136/4, 136/10, 136/13, 136/16 at Wadi, Candolim, Bardez - Goa and to comply with the Order dated 06/07/2017 passed by the Hon’ble NGT, Pune in Application No. 88/2016

1. 08/06/2016: Letter received from Mr. Thomas Mathew for Mr. Nandlal Khemka referring to the Show Cause Notice dated 19/05/2011 issued by the erstwhile GCZMA with regard to alleged illegal construction carried out in the property bearing Sy. No. 136/16 at Wadi, Candolim, Bardez – Goa. 2. Also, an Application bearing No. 88/2016 has been filed by Mr. Nandlal Khemka before the Hon’ble NGT thereby challenging the alleged illegal construction in the property bearing Sy. No. 136/13 by Mr. Hanumant Kandolkar, Mr. Ramesh kandolkar and Mr. Deepak Kandolkar also, alleged illegal construction carriod out in Sy No. 136/16 by Mr. Nitin Sadanand Kandolkar thereby causing encroachment in the private property of the Applicant, Mr. Nandlal Khemka in Sy. No. 136/14 at Wadi, Candolim, Bardez – Goa leading to violation of ownership and proprietary rights of the Applicant. Further, the Applicant has sought to challenge the inaction on part of the Respondent Authorities thereby stating that the GCZMA besides issuance of the Show Cause Notice dated 19/05/2011 has not taken any further action against the said violation. 3. 31/01/2017: The GCZMA was in receipt of another complaint letter from the Applicant with regard to alleged illegal construction / development in the property bearing Sy. No.

Page 23 of 40

136/4 and 136/10 of Village Candolim, Bardez – Goa carried out by Mr. Vernon Rodrigues. 4. Accordingly, an inspection of the site and structures under reference was carried out by the Expert Members of the GCZMA on 03/03/2017 and submitted their report dated 28/04/2017. The site inspection report indicated that all the respondents have encroached in the property bearing Sy. No. 136/14 of Mr. Nandlal Khemka. In order to ascertain and verify the above mentioned encroachments (as per the complainant letter dated 31/1/2017 pertaining to illegal construction carried out by Mr. Vernon Rodrigues) in the property of Mr. Khemka through survey work / mapping of the site, a second site inspection was fixed for 26/7/2017 to take necessary action and for proper disposal of the matter. 5. Further the site inspection was again carried out by the Expert Members of the GCZMA alongwith Technical Officr , GCZMA and the DSLR representative on 26/07/2017. The site inspection report interalia in brief stated as follows: i) The site is a plot of land belonging to Mr. Khemka, which is rectangular in shape and is starting from the road towards the east and extending westwards towards the sea side. The plot is lying partly within 200m and partly within 200 – 500m from the HTL of CRZ III area at Waddi in Candolim village. ii) On either side, towards the northern and southern boundary of the plot there are houses. iii) As per the earlier site inspection report, Mr. Nitin Kandolkar is having two houses in the southern boundary, both G+1 concrete structures lying in plot with Sy. No. 136/14, and falling within 200 – 500m of the HTL. The commercial activity is seen in one of the said houses, although the construction is for residential purpose. iv) On the northern side, there exist 3 houses in a line, one house with a toilet by its side is belonging to Mr. Hanumant Kandolkar, other house belongs Late Mr. Ramesh Kandolkar and the third house is of Mr. Deepak Kandolkar. All the 3 structures are G+1 and are made of concrete. v) Mr. Vernon Rodriguese and his daughter Miss Venesa Rodrigues showed the said construction which is in the plot along the north-western side. They told that they have not done any construction in Sy. No. 136/4 and 136/10. vi) Whatever they have done is within their plot which is adjacent to Mr. Khemka’s plot. They purchased that plot in 1996 as they have the ancestral property by its side towards north. vii) In their plot next to Khemka’s plot towards its northern boundary, they have put up a compound wall with a metallic gate. Inside the compound wall, they say that an old shed covered with tin sheets was existing which was damaged and they could not use it for storing the coconuts and other material. In order to strengthen the shed they only erected un-plastered walls which they could not complete as it was brought to their notice by officials of GCZMA that whatever work has to be done should be by obtaining prior permission from GCZMA. The said incomplete structure is now covered with tin sheets and plastic sheets.

Page 24 of 40

viii) Miss Vesesa Rodrigues informed that if prior permission is required for repairs she is ready to submit the application along with documents for obtaining permission from GCZMA. ix) However, the survey map brought by the DSLR person did not show any existing old structure in the plot, whereas Miss Rodrigues claimed that the old structure is figuring in Cadastal Survey plan..

Conclusion & Recommendation

i) As it is not possible to verify visually the alleged illegal constructions/ encroachments done by either Mr. Vernon Rodriguese and/or by Mr. Kandolkars, the DSLR person has been requested to take exact measurements of the plots with Sy. No. 136/4, 10, 13, 14 and 16 using Total Station and superimpose the survey structure on the existing plan of their record. ii) After getting superimposed plan from DSLR, any encroachment if found shall be brought to the notice of the Authority to be decided for a course of action. 6. It is pertinent to note that, the said Application No. 88/2016 has been disposed of by the Hon’ble NGT, Pune vide Order dated 06/07/2017 granting GCZMA to take action in accordance with law in respect of the structures in question.

The said matter was placed in the 156th GCZMA meeting held on 22/08/2017 wherein the Authority after detailed discussion and due deliberation and in view of the above decided to direct the DSLR to carry out / conduct complete survey of the property in question to verify the encroachments if any and submit a superimposed plan to the GCZMA. The Authority further decided to communicate the date of site inspection for conducting DSLR survey to both the parties and further directed the parties present to remain present for personal hearing on 12/09/2017. The parties present took note of the same.

The said ,matter was again placed in the 158th GCZMA meeting wherein the Authority heard Vernon Rodrigues and as the Complainant is absent for the hearing directed Vernon Rodrigues to remain present before the Authority in its next meeting to be held on 10/10/2017 at 5:00 p.m. The Authority further decided to issue notice of hearing to the Complainant and all the Respondents directing them to remain present for the hearing on 10/10/2017.

In view of the above, the matter was placed for grant of personal hearing to the concerned parties.

Case No. 4.5 :

To comply with the Order dated 26/09/2016 passed by the Hon’ble NGT in Application bearing No. 106/2016 in the matter of Mr. Eliano Pereira V/s. Antares Beach Club & Resort & Ors.

1. The GCZMA was in receipt of a complaint letter dated 08/12/2015 from Mr. Eliano Pereira with regard to the alleged illegal construction of a Resort in the NDZ area in the property bearing Sy.

Page 25 of 40

No. 214/4, 5 at Ozrant Vagator at Anjuna, Bardez- Goa carried out in the name and style of “Antares Beach Club and Resort”. 2. The said complaint letter was forwarded to the Inquiry Committee of the GCZMA for conducting necessary inquiry and submission of report. 3. Accordingly, the Inquiry Committee of the GCZMA conducted the necessary inquiry which includes inspection of the site and grant of personal hearing to the parties and submitted its report on 27/06/2016. 4. The report of the Inquiry Committee interalia in breief states as under: Considering that the property bearing Sy. No. 214/4, 5 of Anjuna Village was purchased in the year 2014 that; the GCZMA granted permission to erect temporary seasonal structures till May 2016, the GCZMA:

a) To remove the 7 temporary seasonal structures in Sy. No. 214/4 and 6 temporary seasonal structures in Sy. No. 214/5 of Village Anjuna if M/s. Antares Beach Club Resort continues to be existing after May 2016. b) To deal with the erection of temporary seasonal structures in CRZ area in accordance with the regulation prevailing for erection of such structures by CRZ Notification.

5. It may be noted that the GCZMA was in receipt of another complaint letter dated 04/04/2016 was received from Mr. Kashinath Shetye with regard to the alleged CRZ violation carried out in the property bearing Sy. Nos. 214/4, 5 at Vagator, Anjuna, Bardez – Goa by “Antares” Robust Resort & Hospitality LLP.

6. An Application bearing No. 106/2016 (WZ) was also filed by Mr. Eliano Pereira before the Hon’ble NGT, Pune thereby challenging the alleged illegal construction of structures being carried out by Antares Beach Club and Resort in the property bearing Sy. No. 214/4 and 214/5 of Ozran Vagator, Anjuna, Bardez – Goa. 7. The said matter was disposed of vide Order dated 26/09/2016 with a direction that the Applicant, Mr. Elaino Pereira, Respondent No. 1, Antares Beach Club and Resort and Respondent No. 5, the Village Panchayat of Anjuna – Caisua are required to be heard before the Respondent No. 3, the GCZMA for the purpose of hearing on 24/10/2016 and the GCZMA is required to dispose of the complaint dated 08/12/2015 filed by Mr. Eliano Pereira in accordance with law within 8 weeks. The Hon’ble NGT further directed Respondent No. 1 Antares Beach Club and Resort and Respondent No. 5, the Village Panchayat of Anjuna – Caisua to place on record the necessary documents in support of their case before the GCZMA on or before 07/10/2016.

8. As per the direction of the Hon’ble NGT, Mr. Eliano Pereira placed on record his relevant documents vide Application dated 10/10/2016 also, the Village Panchayat of Anjuna placed on record their reply on 12/10/2016.

9. In view of the direction of the Hon’ble NGT, the matter was placed for hearing before the Secretary (Env.) on 24/10/2016 wherein the Complainant, Mr. Eliano Pereira present in person. Adv. Vivek Rodrigues remained present on behalf of Anatares Beach Club and Resort. However, none remained present on behalf of the Village Panchayat of Anjuna – Caisua. The Advocates and the parties present were appraised that since the GCZMA has been duly constituted vide

Page 26 of 40

notification dated 26/10/2016 the concerned parties to be heard before the newly constituted Authority.

The said matter was placed in the 139th GCZMA meeting held on 07/02/2017 for grant of personal hearing to the parties wherein the Authority noted that neither the Complainant nor the Respondent were present for the personal hearing, so also, none remained present on behalf of the Village Panchayat of Anjuna. The Authority noted that the time granted by the Hon’ble NGT to decide the complaint has lapsed and hence the Authority after detailed discussion and due deliberation decided to take up the matter for 21st February with final opportunity to the complainant, the respondents and the Village Panchayat. In the event the parties fail to remain present for the next hearing, the Authority will be compelled to take decision ex-parte. The Authority decided to communicate this to all parties concerned well in advance and take this matter on 21st of February at 3.00 pm

The said matter was polaced in the 141st GCZMA meeting held on 21/02/2017. The Complainant, Mr. Elaino Pereira was present. Adv. A. Kakodkar was present on behalf of M/s. Anatares Beach Club and Resort holding for Adv. Savio Soares and placed on record Affidavit in reply and further sought for time.

The Authority after detailed discussion and due deliberation and in view of the principles of natural justice decided to grant time to the parties and informed both the parties that next date of personal hearing before the Authority will be communicated to them shortly.

It may be noted that an Application has been received from Mr. Elaino Pereira stating that he does not wish to proceed ahead with the complaint.

The said matter was placed in the 143rd GCZMA meeting held on 07/03/2017 wherein the Complainant, Mr. Elaino Pereira was absent. Adv. Savio Soares remained present on behalf of M/s. Anatares Beach Club and Resort. The Authority noted that the Complainant, Mr. Elaino Pereira was absent and accordingly decided to grant last and final opportunity to the parties for personal hearing before the Authority and incase if any of the parties remain absent and / or seek adjournment in the matter, no further time / adjournment will be granted and the matter will be decided based on the documents available on record.

The said matter was placed in the 149th GCZMA meeting held on 09/05/2017 wherein the Authority after detailed discussion and due deliberation and taking into consideration the oral as well as written submissions and the material on record decided to accept the findings of the Inquiry Committee of the GCZMA and further decided to issue directions under Section 5 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 directing M/s. Anatares Beach Club and Resort to demolish / remove the structures located in the property bearing Sy. No. 214/4 and 214/5 of Ozran Vagator, Anjuna, Bardez – Goa by 22nd May 2017 and

Page 27 of 40 restore the land to its original condition failing which the Deputy Collector & SDM, Bardez Taluka will demolish the said structures and restore the land to its original condition and report compliance by 26th May 2017. The total cost to be recovered from the alleged violator i.e. M/s. Anatares Beach Club and Resort, as arrears of land revenue in case the Deputy Collector incase the Deputy Collector demolishes the same.

Thereafter, M/s. Antares Beach Club and Resort has filed a representation requesting for an opportunity to present their case inorder to clarify on various issues which are not considered by the Authority

The said request Application was placed in the 150th GCZMA meeting held on 23/05/2017 wherein the Authority perused the representation made by M/s. Antares Beach Club and Resort and after detailed discussion and due deliberation decided not to consider / reject the Application / Representation filed by M/s. Antares Beach Club and Resort for fresh / rehearing in the matter and to reiterate its earlier decision taken in the 149th GCZMA meeting.

It is pertinent to note that a Writ Petition bearing No. 1618/2017 has been filed by Robust Resorts & Hospitality LLP before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay at Goa contending that no that no opportunity of oral hearing was givent to petitioners before passing the impunged order and that the request fo adjournment on account of non-availability of the counsel was not entertained.

The Hon’ble High Court disposed off the matter vide Judgment dated 13/06/2017 directing the GCZMA to grant fresh hearing to the petitioners and take a decision on the proceedings initiated under the Act, in accordance with law.

In view of the above, the matter was placed for grant of personal hearing to the parties.

Case No. 4.6 : To comply with the Order dated 22/12/2016 in Writ Petition No. 1158/2016 of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay at Goa and to decide on the alleged illegal construction of a structure used for commercial purpose in the agricultural land by Mrs. Ruth D’Souza E Ferrao, Mr. Gajanan Tari, Mr. Krishnanath Shirodkar, Mr. Suresh Tukaram Shirodkar, Mr. Dharma Kalangutkar, Mr. Devidas Kalangutkar in the property bearing Sy. No. 120/1 of Village Nerul, Bardez-Goa.

1. The Office of the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (hereinafter referred to as ‘the GCZMA’ in short) is in receipt of a complaint letter dated 15/02/2016 from

Page 28 of 40

Mrs. Leticia E Dos M. Simoes, R/o above St. Cruz Pharmacy, Richie’s Corner, 2nd floor, Segundo Bairro, St. Cruz-Ilhas-Goa with regard to the alleged illegal construction of a structure in CRZ area used for commercial purpose in the agricultural land without obtaining conversion sanad in the property bearing Sy. No. 120/1 of Village Nerul, Bardez-Goa within CRZ limits carried out by Mrs. Ruth D’Souza E Ferrao, Mr. Gajanan Tari, Mr. Krishnanath Shirodkar, all residents of Mahame Wado, Nerul, Bardez-Goa without obtaining prior permission / approval from the concerned authorities. 2. Upon receipt of the said complaint letter dated 15/02/2016, a Show Cause Notice bearing no. GCZMA/N/ILLE-COMPL/15-16/176/3018 dated 07/03/2016 was issued to Mrs. Ruth D’Souza E Ferrao, Mr. Gajanan Tari and Mr. Krishnanath Shirodkar calling upon to show cause as to why a direction to restore the land to its original condition should not be issued. 3. Accordingly, a reply dated 22/03/2016 to the Show Cause Notice is received from Mr. Gajanan Tari Volvoikar which in brief states as follows: a) That his father was in actual physical possession and enjoyment of the house in the property bearing Sy. No. 120/1 (part) for many years i.e. prior to liberation of Goa. b) The said house has house no. 765/1-A which is standing in his name in the records of the Panchayat. c) The said house got electricity connection which is standing in his name in the Electricity Department. d) The said house also got a water connection which is standing in his name in the P.W.D Department. e) That his father was a traditional fisherman and was residing in the said house and doing fishing activities. The structure referred to by the complainant is the part of the said house and was used to keep the fishing nets and other fishing articles in the said house structure. f) That in the year 2002, minor repairs were carried out to the said house by replacing old rafters, old beams and interior plastering for which NOC dated 28/10/2002 was issued by the Village Panchayat of Nerul. g) The existence of the said structure is within the knowledge of the complainant and her ancestors and at no point of time the complainant and her ancestors had ever objected for the said structure. 4. Also, received a reply dated 22/03/2016 from Mrs. Ruth D’Souza e Ferrao which in brief states as under:

Page 29 of 40

a) That she is the occupant of the property bearing Sy. No. 120/1-A and 120/2 of Village Nerul, Bardez-Goa wherein she has her residential house existing since the Portuguese era. b) That the said house is reflected in the survey plan and continues to be in her possession till date. c) That she is operating a Bar and Restaurant in the said property and for which have been issued license by the Department of Excise under no. FCL/992 since the year 1994-95. d) Also has a license from the Food and Drugs Department, Panaji-Goa for operating the Bar and Restaurant. e) That her residential house and the Bar and Restaurant are assessed for house tax purpose with the Village Panchayat office of Nerul under H.No. 763 and 763/1 respectively. f) That the property which includes the residential house and the Bar and Restaurant is fenced by a compound wall since the last several years. There has neither been an encroachment nor any violation of any building Rules and Regulations and / or for that matter any Rules concerning the Coastal Regulations Zone. 5. In the meantime, received a letter dated 17/03/2016 from the complainant Mrs. Leticia E. Dos M. Simoes in continuation to her earlier complaint letter dated 15/02/2016 informing that there are more persons namely Mr. Suresh Tukaram Shirodkar, Mr. Dharma Kalangutkar, Mr. Devidas Kalangutkar all resident of Mahame Vado, Nerul, Bardez-Goa who have done blatant and serious violation in the property bearing Sy. No. 120/1 of Village Nerul, Bardez-Goa without taking necessary permissions from the concerned authorities. 6. In view of the same, a letter bearing no. GCZMA/N/ILLE-COMPL/15-16/176/256 dated 06/05/2016 was issued to the Deputy Collector & S.D.O of Bardez to inspet the site and stop the illegal construction work at site and submit a detailed report in the matter. 7. It may be noted that a Writ Petition bearing No. 1158/2016 has also been filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay at Goa thereby challenging the inaction on the part of the various Authorities in acting against the illegal construction of shed / building / compound wall / repairs / renovation of the structures in CRZ area used for commercial activities and other activities in the Petitioners property bearing Sy. No. 120/1situated at Village Nerul which is an agricultural land as well as CRZ area. 8. The said matter was taken up for hearing before the Hon’ble High Court on 22/12/2016 on which date of hearing the Hon’ble High Court was pleased to direct

Page 30 of 40

the Deputy Collector, Bardez and GCZMA to complete the action under the Show Cause Notice within a period of 3 weeks from the date of Order and further adjourn the matter on 12/01/2017. 9. It is pertinent to note that the said matter came up for hearing before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay at Goa on 12/01/2017 on which date of hearing the Hon’ble high Court was pleased to dispose of the matter with a direction to the GCZMA as well as the Village Panchayat to dispose of the proceedings with respect to the structure as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of 6 months from the date of the Judgment.

10. Accordingly, the said matter was placed in the 136th GCZMA Meeting held on 17/01/2017 wherein after detailed discussion and due deliberation and in view of the aforementioned submissions as well as time sought by the Advocates / parties the Authority decided to conduct inspection of the site in question in order to verify the various aspects such as nature, type of violation i.e. (whether it is a new construction, reconstruction, repair and renovation, extension etc.), area of construction etc. pertaining to the alleged illegal construction activities carried out by the several parties / Respondents and thereafter to take up the matter before the Authority for further personal hearing to the parties.

11. It is pertinent to note that, as far as Mr. Dharma Kalangutkar is concerned, the Authority in its 136th GCZMA meeting also noted that the notice of personal hearing issued by the GCZMA returned unserved with an endorsement “party expired”. The said fact was brought to the notice of the Advocate for the Complainant and was instructed to file the necessary details of the legal heirs of Mr. Dharma Kalangutkar.

12. As per the decision taken by the Authority, a site inspection and survey of the property / structures was conducted by the Expert Members of the GCZMA on 03/03/2017 and on 06/03/2017 as the site being vast.

The observations are given for each of the alleged violator separately as follows;

A) Mr. Gajanan Tari: i) Tari’s house is falling within 100m of the river bank and is in an NDZ area. ii) The plot is admeasuring 280 sq.m. in which one old shed with coconut leaves and tin sheets is seen; abutting this structure, a new construction G+1 with laterite masonary and concrete slab is completed. In front of this new construction, one more house of laterite masonary with Mangalore tiles roof is seen.

Page 31 of 40 iii) Concrete open flooring of nearly 100 sq.m. is completed infront of both the houses in open space. iv) Surveyor Mr. Newton from DSLR measured the structures and the concrete floor. v) There is a gap of 65cm between the old and new concrete house which is against the TCP rules. vi) In front of the house one fishing net was kept to show that the vendor is a fisherman but could not produce any document to that effect.

Conclusion & Recommendation

i) The two houses, one with Mangalorian tiles roof and other with concrete structure are within the 100m of the river for which no permission from GCZMA nor from the TCP could be produced. ii) Hence, the board may deliberate for a decision.

B) Mr. Ruth Ferrao i) This house is in plot having Sy. No. 120/1-1A ii) The house falls within 100m of the river bank area. iii) The existing house is very old with Mangalore tiles roofing. iv) There is a room and a shed with tin sheet with tiled flooring near the house. v) In this shed fishing nets, accessories of canoes and barrels of diesel were seen. vi) Vendor produced old certificate pertaining to traditional fisherman.

Conclusion & Recommendation

i) The shed is very close to the river. ii) The vendor produced certificate of traditional fishing business. iii) No other documents were produced, so he was asked to submit copies of all documents in the GCZMA office for producing in the board meeting. iv) On perusal of these documents, board may decide on the issue.

C) Krishnanath Shirodkar i) This house is in Sy. No. 120/1. ii) Vendor showed his old house of matti walls and Mangalore tiles roofing which is lying within 100m of the river bank area. iii) The house is sufficiently old and existing prior to 1991.

Page 32 of 40 iv) However, the complainant showed one G+1 structure opposite the existing old house constructed on the bank of river Mandovi which could not be inspected from inside as it was having a compound wall and the gate was locked . v) Part of this plot which is protruding out falls in complainant’s Sy. No. 120/1. vi) At the gate a board is fixed giving details of all licenses as follows;

TPB/2367/TCP-16/1494: TCP PHCC/NOC/2016-17/1030:Health GCZMA/N/14-15/96/2882:CRZ VP/MRC/1617/571: Construction License. vii) The above said construction is in Sy. No. 120/8, which is right on the bank of river Mandovi and is a violation of CRZ regulation.

Conclusion & Recommendation i) The owner of the said house was not available, so also the full plot area was covered with compound wall and locked. ii) The GCZMA office may find out the address of the owner from the above mentioned permission numbers and serve notices for inspection to ascertain violation of CRZ regulations.

D) Suresh Tukaram Shirodkar i) At site this house with glass is seen. ii) In front of the house there is a cowshed and buffaloes were seen. iii) Vendor showed the documents, a certificate from the Communidade of Nerul dated 28th August 1993 (to be checked ) indicating that the area has been allotted to him. iv) Order from the Deputy Collector, Mapusa dropping the proceedings against him on 25/3/2011. v) Tenancy order – declaring him as a tenant of Communidade in case No. TNG/GR/43154, dated 165/1997 in property with Sy. No. 120/5 with final allotment of 508 sq.m. of land with house No. 753.

Conclusion and Recommendation i) Although the documents have been shown indicating that he is a tenant and is staying prior to 1991, the construction of slabs seems to be after 1991. ii) Copy of application for NOC of GCZMA for reconstruction of his house dated 23/5/2016 was shown at site, but the work has been physically completed before getting the NOC from GCZMA.

Page 33 of 40

iii) Board may deliberate for a decision.

E) Dharma Kalangutkar i) This is in Sy. No. 120/8 which does not belong to the complainant. ii) There is a construction of open bar and a restaurant as well as residential rooms right on the bank of Mandovi River. iii) The bank of river appears to be extended using laterite pitching on the side. iv) The commercial activity at the bank of the river attracts attention for investigation. v) Vendor says that he has permissions from GCZMA for the repairs of existing retaining wall which may be asked to be produced in the office. vi) The complaint is of temporary shack which was erected in Sy. No. 120/1 of the complainant. vii) The said shack was temporary for which vendor showed provisional permission of GCZMA obtained for one year. The number of letter was GCZMA/N/shack-Hut-CTT-Tent/14-15/534/2054, dt. 19/2/2015. viii) At site the shack was found to be cleared, while the concrete-red oxide floor was existing. ix) The compound wall of laterite for this shack area has been erected to a height of nearly 75 cm. x) The applicant was told to clear the flooring and the compound.

Conclusion and Recommendation

i) All the vendors against whom the complainant is filed by Mrs Leticia Simoes may be the called during the Board meeting along with copies of their documents to substantiate their say. ii) Based on their documents the Board may take the decision.

The said matter was placed in the 151st GCZMA meeting held on 15/06/2017 wherein the Authority perused the site inspection reports prepared by the Expert Members of the GCZMA so also upon perusal of the photographs noted that, all the structures belonging to the Respondents are newly constructed i.e. after coming in to force of the CRZ Notification, 1991 / 2011.

After detailed discussion and due deliberation and on considering the written as well as the oral submissions made by the parties and in view of the above decided to carry out mapping of the structures through the DSLR for verification of the newly constructed structures and thereafter to demolish all the newly constructed structures. In respect of the G+1 structure on the river bank it was decided to request the Sub Divisional Magistrate to

Page 34 of 40 conduct inquiry inorder to identify the owner of the structure so as to issue appropriate notice for personal hearing .

Accordingly, mapping of the structures under reference was carried out through the DSLR. The report alongwith the plan will be circulated during the meeting.

In view of the above, the matter is placed for discussion and decision in the matter.

Case No. 4.7: To discuss and decide on the complaint dated 03/04/2017 received from Mr. Jayprakash Sirsaikar with regard to alleged illegal large scale construction development activities in the property bearing Sy. Nos. 516/3, 4, 5 by M/s. Oasis (Project by Dev Shanti Realators)

1. A complaint dated 03/04/2017 was received from Mr. Jakypraksah Sirsaikar pertaining to alleged illegal large scale construction development activities in the property bearing Sy. Nos. 516 / 3, 4, 5 in NDZ area by filling the salt pans with mud obstructing the free flow of creek water of river carried out by M/s. Oasis (Project by Dev Shanti Realators) at Gauwaddi, Anjuna, Bardez – Goa in violation of CRZ Notification, 2011. 2. Subsequently, upon receipt of the said complaint inspection of the site under reference was carried out by the Expert members of the GCZMA on 02/06/2017. The observations recorded during the site inspection are as follows: i) The site is located on the bank of Arpora Creek, running in north – south direction, lying opposite the Shri Chauranginath Temple in Anjuna, towards the western side of the Anjuna-Calangute main road. ii) There is a wet land (‘Salt Pans” as claimed by the Complainant) lying along the eastern bank of the Arpora Creek with Mangrove trees. iii) Forms I & XIV attached to the file show the name of M/s Dev Shanti Realtors indicating that they are the owners of the plots having Sy. Nos. 516/3, 4 and 5. iv) A total of 6 buildings have been constructed by M/s Dev Shanti Realtors within the eastern bank of Arpora Creek and the Anjuna-Calangute road. Of these, 2 buildings are being constructed within 50m of the Creek bank where the alleged salt pans have been mud filled and reclaimed for the construction work. v) It is seen that a retaining wall has been constructed to the eastern bank of the Creek starting from the small bridge and extending towards north. vi) Also, the area between the retaining wall and the wet land/salt pan has been filled with mud for reclamation of land. vii) The construction of retaining wall has closed the earlier existing sluice gate/opening near the bridge through which the Creek water used to flow freely into the salt pans. viii) Instead, merely about 1m wide opening has been left in the constructed retaining wall, considerably away from the bridge towards north side for the water to flow. ix) The said opening is also away from the earlier existing alleged sluice gate/ opening. x) Behind the two buildings in the salt pan/wet land areas, 4 more buildings have been constructed in one line towards east.

Page 35 of 40

xi) Due to the closure of the sluice gate/opening and due to the drainage from the construction area, the Mangrove plants present within the water body/salt pan existing in the front of the buildings on the bank of the Creek, have dried up and are dead. xii) Reclamation and construction has redirected the flow of surface run-off of rain water towards the access road. xiii) No permission for this construction has been obtained by M/s Dev Realtors from GCZMA. The board installed at site indicates that the V. P. Anjuna has permitted the construction. xiv) Mr. Pagui, who has recently taken over the charge as Secretary of V. P. Anjuna, showed the file with the plan and other documents submitted by the alleged violator to V. P. Anjuna for permission and indicated that the construction done is not as per the plan submitted. He also expressed surprise over the permission issued to M/s Dev Realtors for the said construction in NDZ.

Conclusion and Recommendation

i) The salt pans are a CRZ area, which is having a natural free flow of river/creek water. As per CRZ Notification 2011, the free flow of water to such areas should not be blocked, ii) No land filling is permissible of the salt pan/wet lands for reclamation as per the CRZ Notification 2011. iii) The construction done by M/s Dev Realtors, particularly of the two buildings on the bank of the Creek within 50m from the Creek bank in NDZ area and in salt pan areas by doing mud filling is in clear violation of CRZ Notification 2011. iv) Also, despite being a CRZ area, the alleged violator has not bothered to take permission from GCZMA for the said construction, which is another violation of CRZ regulation. v) Similarly, the Mangrove which are designated as CRZ I area have been cut from large part of the area, whereas, some of the Mangrove allowed to dry up and die by closing the sluice gate which is a third CRZ violation. vi) So, in all, the construction done by M/s Dev Realtors is in gross violation of the CRZ Notifications. vii) A Show Cause Notice may therefore be issued for demolition of the said two buildings in the NDZ area for gross CRZ violation.

In view of the above., the Authority may deliberate and decide in the matter.

Case No. 4.8: To discuss and decide on the complaint dated 07/04/2017 received from Mr. Jaiprakash Sirsaikar with regard to alleged illegal large scale construction development activities in the property bearing Sy. Nos. 129/ 32, 34, 35 at Anjuna near Guru Bar in the name of “Sunshine Goa Guest House” and “Sunshine Goa Anjuna Food Point” by Mr. Thomas Fernandes and Mr. Tony Fernandes

1. A complaint dated 07/04/2017 was received from Mr. Jaiprakash Sirsaikar with regard to alleged illegal large scale construction development activities in the property bearing Sy. Nos. 129/ 32, 34, 35 at Anjuna near Guru Bar in the name of “Sunshine Goa Guest House” and “Sunshine Goa Anjuna Food Point” by Mr. Thomas Fernandes and Mr. Tony Fernandes.

Page 36 of 40

2. The Complainant in his complaint has further informed that Mr. Thomas Fernandes has carried out illegal construction of Guest House in the property bearing Sy. No. 129/35 and also constructed a Restaurant cum Room in Sy. No. 129/32 and illegal running of guest house in Sy. No. 129/34 within 100 m of Anjuna Beach thus violating the CRZ Notification, 2011. 3. Subsequently, upon receipt of the said complaint inspection of the site under reference was carried out by the Expert members of the GCZMA on 02/06/2017. The observations recorded during the site inspection are as follows: ii) The site with Sy. Nos. 129/32, 34 and 35 is lying within 200m from the HTL in CRZ III area of Anjuna village and is an NDZ area. iii) The alleged Sun Shine Guest House is seen to be constructed towards the eastern side of the mud road and Sun Shine Food Point is constructed on the edge of the upland towards the west side of the mud road passing in between. iv) The said Sun Shine Guest House is a G+1 structure, having 9 rooms constructed little away from the road towards the east with a gate on the mud road. There is also another ground floor structure constructed near to the gate. v) The Sy. plan brought by the DSLR representative indicated only an existing old ground floor structure, where Sun Shine Guest House (G+1 Structure) has been constructed. vi) The Sun Shine Food Point constructed across the road towards west is parallel to the mud road, with its back wall lying on the edge of the rocky upland where the waves break on the steps made by the violator for getting down onto the beach. vii) The complainant explained that in Sun Shine Food Point there are rooms on one side towards north and a restaurant on the other side towards south, with an open veranda having a protected wall and the columns. viii) Veranda is used as a utility space for the restaurant, whereas towards west, the steps are made for getting down on to the beach. ix) The Sy. Plan shown by the DSLR representative indicated no earlier existing structure in the area where Sun Shine Food Point is constructed. x) Both the structures are falling within NDZ area of CRZ III of Anjuna village. xi) The Complainant claimed that the said constructions have been made within the last 4-5 yrs without taking any permission from the Competent Authority. xii) Of the two structures, the SUN SHINE GUEST HOUSE appears to be a new structure, whereas the SUN SHINE FOOD POINT appears to be comparatively a older structure.

Conclusion & Recommendation i) The construction of Sun Shine Guest House and Sun Shine Food Point is within the NDZ area of Anjuna village. ii) The Sy plan shows earlier existing ground floor structure only where Sun Shine Guest House is constructed, whereas no earlier structure is evident in the place where Sun Shine Food Point is constructed. iii) No constructions are permissible within the NDZ area as per the CRZ Regulations. iv) If the earlier structure prior to 1991 existed in the NDZ area, the same can be constructed on the existing plinth with proper permissions from GCZMA and the V.P. Anjuna, however, its use cannot be changed. In the present case the building is used for commercial purpose as a Guest House/Hotel. v) Moreover, the Sun Shine Guest House has construction of first floor structure, and is a violation of CRZ regulation.

Page 37 of 40

vi) Both the structures have been constructed without the permission from GCZMA and also is a violation of CRZ Regulation. vii) It is not known whether the violator has taken the permission from V. P. Anjuna as he was not present at site during the site inspection. viii) A Show Cause Notice may be issued to the violator for the said violation of CRZ regulation.

It may also be noted that the Office was in receipt of another complaint dated 12/08/2017 from the Goa Paryavaran Savrakshan Sangharsh Samittee with regard to alleged illegal construction of a huge ground +1 storey RCC building comprising of 9 rooms and another RCC building of ground floor in the NDZ area by the Proprietor of Sun Shine Goa Gjuest House and Sun Shine Goa Anjuna Food Point at Anjuna Beach.

In view of the above, the matter is placed before the Authority for discussion and decision.

Case No. 4.9:

To comply with Order dated 03/07/2017 passed by Hon’ble Tribunal in application no. 44/2015 pertaining to ascertain dimensions of original bund/ pathway of paddy fields at Navo Vaddo, Sernabatim, Colva and restoration of sand dunes.

1. The Colva Civil Consumers Forum, interalia filed Application bearing no. 44/2015 for restoration of sand dunes damaged due to illegal construction of road admeasuring 1km in length by dumping of mud across low lying agricultural paddy fields in CRZ area at Novowaddo, Sernabatim-Colva, Salcete, Goa. 2. The complainant had earlier complained to Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) through SMS on first instance about the aforestated violation and thereafter a written complaint dated 15.3.2015 was filed by the complainant. 3. The GCZMA, conducted a site inspection on 17.3.2015 and noted the following facts as per the Site Inspection Report dated 23.3.2015 i) “On site it was observed that filing of paddy fields has been carried out as shown in photo ‘A,B,C’. ii) The land is being filled for purpose of construction of road which connects to a local village road and to an open property which lies between 0 to 500mts of HTL. iii) The land filling has dimensions of an average width of 3.00mts and height of average of 0.60mts and length of at least 0.50 to 1.00km. iv) A concrete culvert has also been constructed as shown in phot I. v) The landfilling and construction of a culvert is falling within 200 to 500mts of HTL.

Page 38 of 40

vi) On one stretch of filing it is evident that the sand dunes and its vegetation have been cut to for landfilling as shown in Photo ‘E.F.H’. vii) No Notice Board was put up of permission and owner couldn’t produce any documents, plans, approvals at the time of the inspection.”

4. The GCZMA issued a letter dated 31.3.2015 to the Police Inspector, Colva Police Station, Colva, Salcete, Goa communicating its observations regarding violation of the CRZ Notification-2011 and directing immediate action to stop the work at site and register FIR against the violators of law, including the operators, drivers of the earth moving equipment without naming them. The Applicant also complained to Goa State Bio-diversity Board (GSBB) whereupon GSBB along with officials of PWD, the Town and Country Planning Department inspected the site on 13.4.2015. It is the case of complainant that the construction of the said illegal road was carried out with intention of exploiting large stretches of paddy fields for commercial use at the cost of causing severe environment degradation and destruction of rich bio-diversity in the area. It is further the case of complainant that the work referred to hereinabove was undertaken without any permission from any of the Authorities. 5. Vide Order dated 29/05/2015 the Hon’ble Tribunal directed the GCZMA to carry out the inspection at the site in order to verify the status of sand dunes, if any, as well as road or bundh and nature thereof. The GCZMA through their Expert Member had carried out site inspection on 17.6.2015 and submitted his Report dated 21st June, 2015, regarding findings/observations indicating various violations of CRZ Notification, 2011. 6. The site inspection report revealed existence of sand dunes on the site which have been altered/ cut to build the road. As per said report also stated new narrow concrete bridge was also found constructed in the area without any permission and besides final verification with comparison of various GE Images from 2014 onwards the following conclusions could be drawn: a) Colva Sernabatim dune coast is classified under the CRZ-I and Ecologically Sensitive Eco-system; b) Large sand dune has been cut/altered, an act prohibited under the CRZ-2011 Rules c) Activity of mud-filling / depositing /reclamation within CRZ limits- a violation of CRZ-2011 guidelines; d) Reclamation within CRZ is required prior approval from the Competent Authority; e) NOCs from affected plot owners not present;

Page 39 of 40

f) Culvert construction in concrete did not have prior approval.

20. The Goa State Biodiversity Board conducted joint site inspection of the said site on 30-4-2015 and Deputy Collector and S.D,O. Margao, Goa Town and Country Planning Department, Department of Agriculture, Goa State Pollution Control Board, alongwith complainant and submitted inspection report dated 20th May 2015.

21. The Hon’ble Tribunal vide Order dated 03/07/2017 disposed off the abovementioned application with following directions:- a) We constitute a committee headed by the Member Secretary, Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority comprising of the Member Secretary, Goa State Biodiversity Board and the Chief Town Planner, Town and Country Planning Department to ascertain dimensions of the original Bund/pathway of paddy fields at village Navo Vaddo, in Sernabatim-Colva, Salcete-Goa, with reference to the land survey conducted by the Directorate of Settlement and Land Records of Margao, Goa in the year 1970-71 and further to ascertain the extent of sand dune/s destruction due to dumping of soil and mud within three months. b) GCZMA shall on ascertaining the factual situation as aforesaid, take measures to restore the sand dunes by removal of the mud and soil etc. dumped on it and such other necessary scientific measures. c) Expenses incurred for this exercise shall be borne by the Respondent Nos. 4 to 9 and Respondent Nos. 4 to 9 shall initially deposit costs of Rs.2 Lakhs (Two Lakhs) each with the Registry, NGT, (WZ) Bench Pune within a month and defray further expenses incurred by the GCZMA and/or Committee appointed by us as aforesaid for the work assigned to them. d) Amount of Rs. 50,000/- (Fifty Thousand only) be paid to the Applicant as litigation costs from the amount/costs deposited with the Tribunal as aforesaid and the balance be employed for defraying the expenses incurred by GCZMA Committee appointed by us as aforesaid including restoration of environment as directed herein.

In view of the above, the matter is placed before the authority for discussion and deliberation and implementation of abovementioned order.

Sd/- (Member Secretary) Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

**********

Page 40 of 40