Must dismantle ecosystem that allowed Birch to function: HC

Panaji: The Bombay high court, hearing the suo motu matter concerning the Birch by Romeo Lane fire tragedy, said that it would go into the root of the issue, and that all necessary steps would be taken in the best interest of Goa. The court said that the entire ecosystem shielding illegal activities must be dismantled.
The division bench comprising justices Suman Shyam and Amit Jamsandekar observed that the matter is a “serious” one and that commercial interests cannot override others. “We are not going to take this issue lightly,” the court said.

After state govt told the HC that the Birch by Romeo Lane was a permanent structure and completely illegal, the bench asked govt whether it was helpless with regard to the illegal structure. “Are you saying this is a completely illegal structure but, as the state, you are helpless and cannot do anything about it?” the judges asked govt.

To this, advocate general Devidas Pangam said, “We want it to be demolished”.


When the court asked Pangam what action state has taken, he told the court that govt suspended the director of panchayats who granted the unconditional stay against the panchayat’s demolition order, and arrested the owners of the club.
The bench then sought to know what could be done to ensure such an incident is not repeated.

Pangam responded, “We are all with the court. Illegal commercial structures have to be demolished by whatever means. We have no love or affection for illegal commercial structures”.

The amicus curiae in the case, Rohit Bras de Sa, told the court that if building regulations were followed, fire trucks would have been able to access the nightclub and lives could have been saved. He said govt was making legislation to bypass requirements of technical clearance and other legislation to regularise illegal structures on comunidade, private, and govt land.
The lawyer added that despite high court directions to follow building regulations and obtain technical clearances, govt brought in the Shack Act in 2024, doing away with the requirement of a construction licence and technical clearance.

Pangam objected to de Sa’s statements and told the court that the shack policy is meant for temporary structures, and that the sarpanch and secretary of the panchayat must be made respondents in the petition concerning Birch and held responsible. However, de Sa stated that the sum of all problems does not end with the secretary and sarpanch of the panchayat. “There are many other players,” he said.

De Sa said that people were profiteering from illegal structures and added that out of the 25 deaths, 20 were daily-wagers whose families cannot come to court. He sought a day-to-day trial for speedy justice to families and a club policy specifying parameters like capacity and footfall.