The High Court of Bombay in Goa on Thursday issued a notice to the State Government, Secretary City and Country Planning Department, Town and Country Planning Department, Vigilance Directorate and Former Chief Municipal Planner, in which a petition stated the officers towards obtaining directions, which were reportedly “illegally forgiven” under the controversial provision of the Goa Town and Control Planning (TCP) Act.
According to the petitioner, activist Swapnesh Sherlekar, the fee for improvement of some land areas was illegally waived under Section 17 (2) of Goa Town and Country Planning (TCP), which is on the “specific” that is on the “specific” that “deletion of the proposed road fee is not applicable”.
Section 17 (2), which was introduced through an amendment to the TCP Act and notified in 2023, the regional plan of Goa allows the conversion of private -owned plots in 2021 based on individual applications from such parties, “unknowingly corrects errors” and “improving the errors” and “improving ingredients”. The government informed the fees for the improvement of areas under Section 17 (2) of the Act on 16 March 2023. Subsequently, on March 28 last year, the revised fee for zone changes was reported through the supplementary official gazette. HC read the section in March this year.
The petition stated that in the list of cases considered for the improvement of the area under Section 17 (2) of the Act, many entries do not apply for “proposed road fee delay” without any statutory basis for such exemption in many entries “.
The petition stated that in such cases, TCP Minister Vishwajit Rane had assets, who are also a defendant in the petition, alleging that he “benefited from unauthorized exemption of fees”. The petition stated that there are “many” cases of removal of the proposed roads since informing the Act, which require an inquiry for similar unauthorized discounts. It further stated that there is no provision in the TCP Act or any rules, regulations or information that provide a fee exemption for removal of roads proposed under Section 17 (2) of the Act.
The petition stated that the defendant authorities have misused power in exempting some applications from paying some applications from paying any legal fee without any legal basis or justification, “manifested arbitrary, garland friend and power have been misused.” The petition further claimed that the defendant officials have failed to discharge their duties as per law and have worked instead that suggests collusion to provide unfair advantage to some individuals at the cost of public treasures.
On Thursday, the High Court heard the presentations of the petitioners.
The story continues below this advertisement
In the order, the court said: “At this stage, we consider it appropriate to issue a notice to respondent 6 in the capacity of the Chief Town Planner (Planning) with 1 to 4 to 4 …” The court directed the respondents to file an affidavit in response within three weeks.
The court said that it has “noted a specific petition in the petition, which revolves around the properties related to the night”, but did not issue a notice to him.
(Tagstotransmit) High Court of Bombay in Goa (T) Swapnesh Sherlekar (T) Maharashtra (T) Goa Town and Country Planning Act (T) Fees Wave for Land Zone Improvement (T) Goa Land Zone Improvement (T) Indian Express News (T) Current Affairs (T) Current Affairs
