The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Goa government and other respondents on a petition filed by Goa Bachao Abhiyan (GBA) challenging the Bhutani Infra project in Sancoale. The petition concerns alleged environmental violations and regulatory issues related to the development, including claims of unlawful hill-cutting and irregularities in obtaining project approvals.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohan condoned the delay in the matter and granted Goa Bachao Abhiyan leave to file a special leave petition. The development brings the dispute over the Sancoale project before the apex court after earlier proceedings before the Bombay High Court.
Dispute Over Acqua Eden Project
The petition relates to Acqua Eden, a project comprising multi-family villas and swimming pools in Sancoale. The project is being developed by Parmesh Constructions, also known as Bhutani Infra.
In November 2024, the Bombay High Court had dismissed a public interest litigation filed by Goa Bachao Abhiyan challenging the technical clearance, construction licence and plan approvals granted for the project. The approvals were issued by the Town and Country Planning Department and the Mormugao Planning and Development Authority.
The High Court had held that the PIL lacked merit and that the objections raised by GBA were not supported by sufficient material. The organisation subsequently approached the High Court with a review petition, but that petition was also dismissed.
Questions Raised Over Hill-Cutting and Project Approvals
Goa Bachao Abhiyan has sought the appointment of an independent expert committee to investigate what it describes as illegal hill-cutting and regulatory lapses associated with the project.
The organisation has argued that the project could result in environmental damage to the Sancoale area and has raised concerns regarding the manner in which permissions were obtained. It has maintained that its petition was filed in the larger public interest, including the protection of the local environment and the interests of future residents.
GBA has also alleged that environmental violations and representations made to secure project permissions require further examination. It has sought an independent investigation into the allegations rather than relying solely on the existing approvals.
High Court Had Examined Technical Objections
The Bombay High Court had previously considered several technical objections raised by Goa Bachao Abhiyan. One of the issues concerned the computation of slope levels and the accuracy of contour plans submitted in connection with the project.
While dismissing the review petition, the High Court said it had examined the alleged discrepancies in the calculation of slope levels. It concluded that the contour plans were based on on-site surveys conducted using total station survey methods. The court noted that these methods had an accuracy level of 90-95% compared with Survey of India topographical sheets.
The High Court also considered allegations concerning possible violations of the Building Regulations, 2010 and other statutory provisions. It concluded that the technical objections raised were not sufficient to invalidate the permissions granted by the competent authorities.
Supreme Court Proceedings
The Supreme Court’s decision to issue notice means that the concerns raised in the petition will now be considered at the apex court level. The notice was issued to the Goa government and other parties following GBA’s challenge to the project.
The case places environmental concerns, technical assessments and development approvals at the centre of the legal proceedings. While the High Court had earlier found the objections unsubstantiated, the Supreme Court will now consider the petition following the grant of leave.
The proceedings are significant for the Sancoale project because the allegations relate not only to the construction activity but also to the processes through which technical clearances, construction licences and planning approvals were granted.
For now, the Supreme Court’s notice does not establish the allegations made by Goa Bachao Abhiyan. The allegations remain subject to judicial consideration, while the earlier findings of the Bombay High Court form part of the background to the current proceedings.
The case will therefore be watched by stakeholders involved in the project as the Supreme Court examines the petition and the issues raised concerning environmental compliance, hill-cutting, technical surveys and statutory approvals.
Image- sci.gov.in
