Authority has suo motu powers to pursue violations: GCZMA on illegal nightclub

Panaji: The complaint against a nightclub operating in an area categorised as salt pans in Bardez took an unexpected turn. The matter before the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) was being pursued by the complainant entirely through his lawyer, with him never appearing at hearings. The nightclub owners disputed the genuineness of the complainant and sought proceedings to reveal his identity.

After hearing the dispute over the complainant’s identity for nearly three years, the GCZMA ruled last month that the authority has suo motu powers to pursue violation cases, and accepted the complainant’s advocate’s argument that he was just an informant of the violation.

The matter pertains to illegal extensions of structures being used for commercial activity, covering an area of 35,000sqm in khazan land.

“The role of the complainant is only to intimate violations. On receipt of the complaint, the authority conducts its own inquiry and then decides the matter. Hence there is no major role of the complainant in the matter. The authority has powers to suo motu carry on with the matter,” the GCZMA said in its order.

It asked the complainant to provide a certified copy of his ID proof before the next hearing in June, “failing which the authority shall proceed suo motu”.

The complaint dates back to Dec 2019, pointing to the violation of environment norms in a no-development zone (NDZ). The complainant also approached the NGT, which asked the GCZMA to hear the matter afresh, as a complaint in the issue was heard in 2012 and demolitions carried out as per an order in 2014.

In April 2022, the complainant presented the draft of the CZMP depicting that the structure falls within a salt pan area. It was during a hearing in March 2023 that the respondent said there is an issue over the identity of the complainant and, during successive hearings, continued to question whether the complainant was a fictitious person. The respondent said the presence of the complainant was a must. The advocate for the respondent told the authority that even in the high court, there are certain rules for filing PILs that state that personal details have to be provided to show bona fides.

But the complainant did not appear before the GCZMA despite several directions. Finally, during a hearing last year, the complainant, through his advocate, said the GCZMA’s inspection report shows the structures are illegal and the land is a khazan.

The authority also noted that from its records the structures fall within NDZ and have no permissions from the GCZMA. It asked the respondent to come clear on the approvals, failing which it would proceed with taking action.Get real-time updates and result insights on the CBSE 12 Result 2026.