Current Affairs

Activists Demand Action Against Those Who Allotted Land for SEZ

Both the groups that agitated against the Special Economic Zones in Goa – Goa’s Movement Against SEZ (GMAS) and SEZ Virodhi Manch (SVM) – on Wednesday demanded action against those responsible for allotting land to SEZ promoters in Goa.
Speaking to media persons Advocate Collin Gonsalves who had represented SVM in the Court said that Goa Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) officials others involved in allotting the land should be jailed.

He said the land allotment was a criminal fraud and a clear case of corruption, misappropriation and cheating and argued that such acts should not be ignored and action has to be taken against those involved.
SVM members besides demanding the immediate resignation of the GIDC officials involved in this scam also demanded a CBI or judicial probe into the whole land allotment scam.
The SVM has also demanded the resignations of GSIDC chairman Chandrakant alias Babu Kavlekar, Power Minister Aleixo Sequeira and Nitin Kuncolienkar for being ‘partners in crime’ and threatened to launch an agitation in the new year if the government does not take action against those responsible by then.
Meanwhile, Goa’s Movement Against SEZ Convenor Matanhy Saldanha demanded that the Government of India should de-notify the three SEZ in Goa within a month and also demanded a judicial probe in the whole scam of allotting land to the promoters.
While pointing out that the High Court had made highly critical comments on the procedure adopted to allot the land to the SEZ promoters, he demanded that the land acquired for SEZ should be reverted back to the original owners.
Besides, GMAS has also demanded that the six companies that were allotted the land should be blacklisted from getting any land for any industries in future in Goa.
It may be recalled that the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court in its order last moth had observed that land was allotted to the SEZ promoters in an arbitrary and hasty manner without even scrutinizing their applications properly.
Besides, the Court also observed that the procedure was not fair and transparent and that the allotment did not stand the test of reasonableness.

Leave a Reply

Back to top button

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker