99% allottees not ‘ original’ CCP report on market shops opens can of worms
TEAM HERALD teamherald@ herald- goa. com PANJIM: The extensive and conclusive report on allocation of shops in the Panjim market prepared by CCP Commissioner Sanjith Rodrigues based on his survey, has opened a can of worms, and left the Corporation in a fix, as 99 per cent of the shops are not in possession of intended allottees and CCP itself has accepted transfer fees for changing the lessee without giving them legal documents. In the survey just of the first floor of phase I & II, the Commissioner has had to divide the shops into the following categories ~ Shops A, A- 1, B, C, D, D- 1, gaddas, pending High Court cases and Konkan Railway stalls. Before demolishing small stalls, the GSIDC and the CCP had conducted a survey which noted a total of 1424 vendors with an existing carpet area 5757 m2 and had allotted space in the proposed market with carpet area of a total 6559 m2 to the same vendors. According to the survey conducted there are 32 stalls which have cases pending in the High Court for various reasons including cases challenging allotments and other issues. Of these 32, 15 shops have owners other than those who were originally allotted the shops, 12 were sealed, two were shut at the time of the survey, possibly because the operators fled at the time of the survey, and the balance face other complications such as not being found on the plan, double entries, etc. Of the 20, ‘ Konkan Railway’ stalls, all have owners different from the original allottees and one was closed at the time of survey. Most of these shops were shops vending either cloth, readymade garments, shoes, originally and have now become cellphone shops, shops selling CDs, DVDs and other such business. But the largest number of shops are the B and C type shops with B type numbering 125 including the number of shops that have been sub- divided and 157 C type shops. Of these 177 shops, just three, strictly speaking have both the intended allottee and the final allottee as well as the nature of trade the same ~ S N Pathan who has his shop and continues to use it for tailoring and Suresh Narvekar, whose shop is still a shoemart and Vishvas Dhamaskar who continues to be a cosmetic and bangle seller. There are other shops, just around half a dozen, which are still being run by the intended allottee, but who have changed their trade. The other 99 per cent of shops are not in possession of intended allottees or were either transferred or sub- let to other parties. It must be remembered that according to the Corporation rules, no shop can be sub- let or transferred to another except if the person is a blood relation. What complicates matter further is the fact that in many cases the Corporation, has collected ( possibly illegally) transfer fee from certain parties who claimed to be tenants of the Corporation. However, with the Corporation not having legally signed any lease agreement with any of the vendors, the question of them being tenants does not arise. During the last meeting, CCP Commissioner Sanjith Rodrigues had suggested that the Corporation approach the Directorate of Municipal Administration ( DMA) for legal advice. However, the council chose to ‘ study the matter and decide at a special meeting.’ http://www.epaperoheraldo.in/epapermain.aspx
