Bombay High Court Implements Conditional Approval Clause for TCP Decisions
The Bombay High Court delivered a significant ruling on Wednesday, stating that all approvals for additional Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and building height granted by the Town and Country Planning (TCP) department will be subject to the outcome of petitions currently before the court. This decision introduces a crucial safeguard in the approval process, ensuring that any permissions are provisional pending judicial review.
Court Mandates Specific Clause in Approvals
While granting these approvals, the TCP board must incorporate a specific clause stating that such applications will be granted subject to the outcome of the petitions. This directive aims to prevent irreversible decisions that could be overturned later, providing a legal framework for conditional permissions.
Final Hearings Scheduled for June 15, 2025
The High Court has fixed June 15, 2025 for final hearings in the petitions challenging the August 2023 amendment to the Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations. This amendment controversially granted additional FAR and height permissions, sparking legal challenges from various stakeholders.
State Reveals 255 Pending Applications
During the proceedings, the state government informed the High Court that 255 applications for additional FAR and height are currently pending. This backlog highlights the scale of potential development affected by the court's ruling and the importance of the upcoming hearings.
Legal Challenges to Amendment Act and Regulations
The High Court is hearing Public Interest Litigations (PILs) challenging Section 5(1) of the Goa (Regulation of Land Development and Building Construction) Act, 2008, as amended by the Amendment Act of 2022. The petitioners argue that this amendment empowers the steering committee to modify regulations without pre-publication or public consultation in certain cases, thereby arbitrarily abrogating the public's right to be heard.
This process is seen as contrary to established procedures under the act and constitutional principles of transparency and participatory governance. Additionally, the petition challenges the validity of Regulation 6.1.1(a) (Note 2) of the GLDBCR 2010, claiming it fatally damages existing regulations and the Regional Plan in force.
Goa Foundation's Allegations and Data
The Goa Foundation, in its petition, has stated that the amendment permits random and ad hoc plot-specific increases in FAR and height, amounting to de facto zone changes without any statutory process, public notice, or corresponding infrastructure assessments. The organization revealed that between 2023 and January 2025, the TCP granted 739 approvals for additional FAR and height, with these relaxations provided without charge as largesse until the petition was filed.
According to the Goa Foundation, these relaxations violate the zoning prescriptions of the Goa Regional Plan 2021 and result in arbitrary and unregulated development incompatible with ecological sustainability and infrastructural capacity. The amendment is accused of bypassing mandatory statutory procedures for zoning changes, subverting the framework of planned development under the TCP Act, 1974, and the Building Regulations.
Constitutional Violations and Procedural Concerns
The petition further alleges that these actions violate fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before the law, freedom of speech and expression, and protection of life and personal liberty, respectively. Additionally, the powers of the scrutiny committee and the town and country planning board to make recommendations are challenged as opaque, arbitrary, unchannelised, and ultra vires the parent statute.
This comprehensive legal battle underscores the tension between development initiatives and regulatory oversight, with the High Court's upcoming hearings poised to set important precedents for land use and construction policies in Goa.
