http://www.oheraldo.in/news/Main%20Page%20News/Did-Civil-Aviation-Minister-lie-to-Parliament-or-is-State-lying-to-Mopkars-High-Court/46648.html
Did Civil Aviation Minister lie to Parliament or is State lying to Mopkars & High Court? BY AJAY THAKUR Did Civil Aviation Minister lie to Parliament or is State lying to Mopkars & High Court? BY AJAY THAKUR PANJIM, March 21 This might qualify for the greatest gaffe or a blatant lie that both Central Government as well as Goa Government meted out to people of Goa. On March 9, Union Minister for Civil Aviation Vyalar Ravi informed Lok Sabha that about 1000 acres of land had been ‘acquired’ for Mopa Airport. 24 hours later, M K Vasta, Special Land Acquisition Officer for Mopa Airport told Herald that Revenue Department had only ‘approved the acquisition’ of land for Mopa at four villages namely Mopa, Uguem, Chandel and Ambarem earlier last week and that award is yet to take place. The process of land acquisition starts with notification, hearing of objections, approval from Revenue Department, payment of compensation, acquisition of land and then possession. The slip between cup and lip has happened yet again at Mopa. It is not the first time that Centre and State have spoken different languages on Mopa. In the past when Herald had broken the news that Amman & Whitney was the chosen Consultant for Mopa, Centre confirmed it while State denied. Land acquisition is the new turf for doublespeak. But there is more to how Centre-State’s duality on Mopa Land Acquisition raises eyebrows. On May 5, 2010, passing an interim order on Writ Petition No. 510/2009, High Court of Bombay at Goa instructed “Respondents (read State Government) shall be at liberty to proceed with the acquisition proceedings. However, this shall be entirely without prejudice to all the rights and contentions of the parties. Further respondents shall not take possession of the land which is the subject matter of the petition”. Either an overzealous State Government went overboard in stating to the Centre that land was already with them or an insensitive Centre cocksure that any opposition did not exist, either ways the land users of Mopa left stunned whom to believe. Even though the Court Room Battle for Mopa’s emergency land acquisition is not yet over and a final round of hearing happening this week, SLAO Vasta has sprung up another surprise. When Herald quizzed him if he was aware of Writ Petition Nos. 510/2009, 568/2009 and 135/2010 at High Court, all dealing with ‘what was the emergency in land acquisition’ his reply was “I am not aware”. Strange, as over 100 of project affected people in and around the affected site had filed three writ petitions at High Court of Bombay’s Goa Bench against the arbitrary manner of acquisition but the main concerned acquiring authority wasn’t aware. Ground Zero is a picture of shock and horror as most of the residents never got notices of Land Acquisition. At other times, they were not aware of dates of hearing. Goa Government in a bid to beat any popular unrest followed a code of silence and unleashed LAA 1894’s infamous emergency clause Section 17(i) which gives the Collector unchallenged powers to acquire land without hearing the owners/tillers. Interestingly, earlier this month, two days before Vyalar Ravi’s admission, Supreme Court (on March 7) in its landmark judgement on emergency land acquisitions had held that right to possess a land being a right to property cannot be taken away without conducting an enquiry under the Land Acquisition Act (LAA). “Admittedly the LAA, a pre-Constitutional legislation of colonial vintage is a drastic law, being expropriatory in nature as it confers on the State a power which affects a person’s property right”. The Bench comprising Justice G S Singhvi and Justice A K Ganguly had said “the concept of public purpose on this broad horizon must also be read into the provisions of emergency power under Section 17 with the consequential dispensation of right of hearing under Section 5A of the LAA. The courts must examine these questions very carefully when little Indians lose their small property in the name of mindless acquisition at the instance of the State.” Writing the judgment Justice Ganguly also said: “Even though right to property is no longer a fundamental right, and was never a natural right, and is acquired on a concession by the State, it has to be accepted that without right to some property, other rights become illusory. The concept of public purpose cannot remain static for all time to come”. Will justice then overcome the reign of Centre-State lies? -- Please post your comments on my Blog: http://goanidentity.blogspot.com/ Please also see below: 1. Benaulim Village Action Committee: http://www.bvacbenaulim.blogspot.com/ 2. "Rape of Goa" : http://www.parrikar.com/blog/the-rape-of-goa/ 3. MAND - an adivasi-rights resource centre : http://mandgoa.blogspot.com/ 4. EVERY GOAN SHOULD SEE THIS VIDEO: http://infochangeindia.org/Infochange-documentary.html 5. Goa's Identity Movement group on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com//#/group.php?gid=193497031686 6. Official Government Site NRI Office (GOA): http://www.globalgoans.org.in/
