------------------------------------------------------------------ Do GOACAN a favour, circulate this email to your family members, relatives, neighbours and friends. Help others be BETTER INFORMED, The time is come for the people of Goa to ORGANISE not AGONISE !! ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Documented by Goa Desc Resource Centre Ph:2252660 Website: www.goadesc.org Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Press Clippings on the web: http://www.goadesc.org/mem/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------- High Court Empowers Citizen Action - Part 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Readers of newspapers in Goa will have noticed a number of advertisements issued by Municipal Councils in the past few days. These advertisements solicit complaints from citizens about violations of open spaces, including parking, in their areas.
The advertisements are being issued pursuant to a direction issued by the High Court. In the past couple of months, the Bombay High Court has issued several orders and directions, not only in relation to the protection and enjoyment of open spaces, but in connection with other matters of public interest as well.
This article by NORMA ALVARES, public interest lawyer, highlights the major aspects of these orders. Ms Alvares argues that the Court has done its duty. It is now up to the citizens to arm themselves with the powers given to them by the High Court and to proceed to improve their neighbourhood environments ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Every day we hear people complain about how corrupt, inefficient and unresponsive the government has become: how useless our laws are in the face of political patronage and interference; how every public authority emasculates itself and refuses to act on citizen complaints; how public welfare is daily sacrificed to further private interest.
Public authorities collect their salaries and continue to sleep, waking up only when a crisis is reached. The recent jaundice epidemic of Panjim city is a classic illustration of this state of affairs.
"Goa is finished," we moan. "There is little we can do about it." But is that really true? Every once in a while a grand opportunity comes along that was completely expected. Citizens get a chance to do something by themselves to reverse public ills. Sometimes, such opportunities are provided by the Legislature: the Goa Right to Information Act is a good example. But opportunities also come from other sources sensitive to the public interest.
Over the last two months, the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court has passed several key public interest orders which are so wide-ranging and spectacular that they could benefit - if zealously implemented - not just citizens in Goa but in other parts of the country as well.
Among the several, I wish to refer to just three orders issued by the High Court during the recent monsoon session. These are of public importance and demand a little activism from citizens if they are to be translated into reality.
The first set of orders concerns open spaces. Last year a Residents' Welfare Association in Vasco called the "Down Mangor Valley", approached the High Court with a Public Interest Litigation complaining that the open space earmarked on the development plans of their colony had been encroached upon by unauthorised constructions.
Their quality of life and their right to a healthy environment, they told the Court, was thus adversely affected. The Court, while disposing off the matter, categorically held: "It has now been judicially recognised that the need to keep set back/open areas is a recognition by the State for maintaining environment and ecology of the area and to ensure for the people of the area a place for recreation or leisure, whilst at the same time serving as green lungs for the area.
If the object, therefore, is to provide a better environment for the residents, can that objective be defeated on the specious plea that encroachers on the land are residing there for a long time? Neither the provisions of the Municipalities Act nor the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act provide for any regularisation of such encroachment on open spaces.
Once an open space, it has always to be an open space, to be used for the purpose for which it has been kept."The Court thereafter went on to direct the demolition of the encroachments so that the open space could be restored to the community.
The Court realised, however, that Mangor Valley was not the only case of its kind and that stealing of open space by unscrupulous builders and unauthorised occupants was perhaps a common practice in the State.
The Court therefore directed that a copy of its judgement be sent to the Chief Secretary of the State of Goa so that appropriate directions/guidelines could be issued to all authorities concerned with planning and development, for compliance of its orders. Further, it called for a status report about the implementation of its directions to be filed as well.
The Court had occasion to revisit the issue again in June 2003 this year. The compliance-cum-status report filed by the Government, by and large informed the Court that since there were no complaints from citizens regarding any violations of their open spaces, this showed that all was well in the municipal areas of Goa.
Such a status report would strain the credulity of any ordinary citizen. The Court was naturally unimpressed by it as well. What the municipal councils were brazenly declaring was that the onus or responsibility for violations of open spaces was not their responsibility or that of their councillors. It was the responsibility of citizens.
Municipalities would not interfere if there were no complaints, despite the fact that the councils had staff for the purpose and councillors from each ward. As for filing of complaints, experience, in fact, indicated the opposite. Invariably builders give planning laws and building regulations the go-by so that mandatory open spaces are seen only on paper, blue prints and draft plans.
These plans are not available in normal course to the public. So complaints cannot be filed. Consequently public spirited citizens, residential societies and NGOs have to approach the Courts time and again for redressal, since even their complaints are merely filed by the authorities who in any case are in cahoots with the builders.
There are, in fact, two pending petitions which complain that buildings in Panaji and Mapusa have converted their parking lots into commercial shops.
In the circumstances, the Court felt it necessary to pass additional general directions so that citizens do not have to approach the judiciary repeatedly on account of inaction on the part of the authorities.
Briefly these directions are as follows:
1. The municipal councils are to issue a public notice inviting the
citizens to file complaints in this regard. If you read your newspaper
carefully, you will see some of these advertisements already
appearing, issued by different municipal councils.2. A separate register noting the date of receipt of the complaint
is to be maintained by the Council.3. To ensure that complaints are disposed off within a reasonable
time frame the court has directed that action on the complaint
is to be taken within one month thereof, after following necessary
procedures (e.g. notice to the parties concerned, etc.). Thereafter
the matter is to be disposed of within three months.4. Being aware that orders of the Council are usually appealed
before the appellate tribunal, the Court has also directed the
tribunal to dispose of such appellate proceedings within a
maximum period of nine months.5. It is common experience that orders for demolition of illegal
structures are invariably stayed by the appellate tribunal ex- parte,
i.e., without hearing anyone except the appellant. Thereafter the
appeal languishes in the tribunal for years and the violator
continues to enjoy the fruits of his illegal activity. So the Court
has directed that interim orders will not be granted without first
hearing the municipal council (which presumably will defend its
decision). If there is reason to depart from this direction, the
reasons for this must be recorded in the order.(continued in Part 2) ----------------------------------------- INSIGHT in HERALD 7/9/03 ----------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- GOA CIVIC AND CONSUMER ACTION NETWORK --------------------------------------------------------------------------- an initiative of GOA DESC RESOURCE CENTRE to promote civic and consumer rights in Goa --------------------------------------------------------------------------- GOACAN Post Box 78 Mapusa, Goa 403 507 Tel: 2252660 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] website: www.goacan.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
##########################################################################
# Send submissions for Goanet to [EMAIL PROTECTED] # # PLEASE remember to stay on-topic (related to Goa), and avoid top-posts #
# More details on Goanet at http://joingoanet.shorturl.com/ # # Please keep your discussion/tone polite, to reflect respect to others #
##########################################################################
