Sure, here’s a rewritten version of the content:
PANAJI: On Wednesday, the Bombay High Court indicated that all approvals for additional Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and height granted by the Town and Country Planning (TCP) would hinge on the resolutions of ongoing petitions before the court.
The court instructed that the TCP board must include a clause in these approvals, emphasizing that the applications would be contingent upon the outcomes of the petitions.
Final hearings for these petitions, which challenge the amendments to the Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations from August 2023, have been scheduled for June 15.
The state informed the high court that there are currently 255 pending applications for additional FAR and height approvals.
The HC is reviewing Public Interest Litigations (PILs) which contest Section 5(1) of the Goa (Regulation of Land Development and Building Construction) Act, 2008, as amended by the 2022 amendment.
This amendment authorizes the steering committee, as per the Act, to modify the Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations of 2010 without prior public notice or consultation in certain cases, thereby undermining established public participation rights and principles of transparency.
The petition also challenges the legality of Regulation 6.1.1(a), asserting that it undermines existing regulations and the current Regional Plan.
The Goa Foundation’s petition argues that this amendment allows for arbitrary increases in FAR and height on a plot-by-plot basis, essentially equating to zone changes without the necessary statutory processes, public notifications, or appropriate infrastructure assessments.
It noted to the court that from 2023 to January 2025, the TCP had already granted 739 approvals for these modifications.
Prior to this petition, such significant relaxations were granted without any associated fees, treated as discretionary benefits.
The Goa Foundation maintains that these relaxations contravene the zoning regulations set forth in the Goa Regional Plan 2021 and lead to uncontrolled development that disrupts ecological sustainability and infrastructural integrity.
According to the foundation, the recent amendment negates required statutory procedures for zoning modifications, undermines the planned development framework established under the TCP Act of 1974 and the Building Regulations, and violates the petitioners’ fundamental rights as enshrined in Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
The petition also questions the authority of the scrutiny committee and the TCP board in making recommendations, claiming that their powers lack clarity, are arbitrary, and exceed what is permitted under the parent statute.
Feel free to adjust any specific wording further if needed!
