Goa must look ‘with all seriousness’ Mauvin’s aide’s role in MPDA: HC

PANAJI: The high court of Bombay at Goa has asked the state government to look at the potential conflict of interest in the way Mormugao Planning and Development Authority (MPDA) took decisions and asked the BJP-led government to look at the role played by civic body member Kamla Prasad Yadav and panchayat minister Mauvin Godinho’s aide’s role “with all seriousness”.
Expressing concerns over potential conflict of interest in the way MPDA took decisions, the HC said that these decisions are “vulnerable” to be overturned “if challenged”.
The high court’s observations came while ordering actions against “unauthorised constructions mushrooming” around Goa International Airport and in light of the resolution passed by MPDA on November 18 rejecting the colour-coded zoning map (CCZM) prepared by the Navy as per the civil aviation ministry’s provisions.
Godinho, the Dabolim MLA, is also a member of the MPDA, while Yadav is a deputy sarpanch of Chicalim panchayat.
Godinho had accused the Navy of ruling Goa by proxy and regulating construction around the state’s lone airport. At the core of Godinho’s outrage are buildings with over 100 flats—survey numbers 60/2, 63/5 and 63/8— built by Yadav.
Though justices Mahesh Sonak and Mukulika Jawalkar chose not to go deeper into the issue, they did stress that it “disturbing” to see that Yadav is a member of MPDA and allegedly responsible for “unauthorised construction” around the airport.
“What is more disturbing is that one of the parties to these petitions Kamla Prasad Yadav (builder) who is alleged to have undertaken the unauthorised construction in prima facie defiance of 2015 Rules and the CCZM prepared thereunder, in his capacity as the deputy sarpanch and member of the MPDA, is also a party to the resolution,” the court said.
The high court said that “impression is created” that MPDA and the Chicalim panchayat are interested in protecting illegal structures “regardless of issue of aviation safety”.
The counsel for MPDA and the lawyer for Yadav informed the high court that the Town And Country Planning Act did not prevent members of planning authorities from taking part in decisions where there is personal interest.
Counsel for the petitioner, advocate Rohit Bras De Sa said that Yadav’s personal interest was served when MPDA passed the resolution. “This is a serious issue because you are not only playing with national security but also with people’s lives. The conflict of interest can be seen in the resolution where basically they were trying to defy the court,” De Sa said.
“According to us, at least prima facie, this is a case of conflict between interest and duty,” the high court said.
The high court also pulled up the state government for not doing enough to stop the illegalities around the airport.
“In a petition of this nature, our role is to basically activate statutory authorities who, despite acknowledging that unauthorised constructions, which pose danger to aviation safety, have come up around the airport, have failed to take any meaningful action against the same,” the high court said.