SCRUTINY : BRAVE LOTLIKARS WIN BATTLE OF BORIM : HC Stay on land acquisition

The Bombay High Court’s interim intervention in the proposed new Borim bridge project has given important temporary protection to farmers, agricultural tenants, residents and landholders in Loutolim, Borim and the surrounding areas. The Court has stayed the implementation of the Section 3D land-acquisition declaration and restrained the authorities from taking physical possession of the land, dispossessing affected people, beginning construction, cutting trees or creating contractual and third-party rights over the acquired property. The government may continue seeking CRZ, forest and other statutory clearances, conducting non-invasive surveys and processing plans and tenders, but no on-site construction can proceed without the Court’s permission. This is not a final cancellation of the bridge. But it prevents the project from crossing the point of no return before the legal, environmental and technical questions are finally decided. In this edition of *Scrutiny*, INK Goa examines the contradictions surrounding the project and the manner in which the land-acquisition process was advanced. Nearly 197 objections filed by affected villagers were rejected. The petitioners allege that the objections were dealt with mechanically and that the authorities failed to properly examine questions concerning the environment, livelihoods, traffic, project design and alternative alignments. A central issue is whether the government proceeded with land acquisition even before the final Detailed Project Report, design, alignment and statutory clearances were firmly in place. The documents referred to in the petition indicate that drawings, junction designs, tree enumeration and additional land requirements continued to be revised even after the acquisition process had advanced. The traffic justification is also disputed. The principal government traffic survey was carried out in 2016, when heavy vehicles were reportedly being diverted through Borim because of restrictions on the old Zuari bridge. That survey recorded nearly 33,990 passenger-car units per day. A seven-day count conducted by villagers in 2024 recorded approximately 12,010 passenger-car units—almost 65 per cent lower. Neither figure should be accepted blindly. What was required was a fresh, independent traffic study after the new Zuari bridge opened, clearly separating local traffic, airport and Vasco traffic, industrial traffic, port freight, heavy commercial vehicles and the projected growth of coal and mineral movement. The most serious environmental dispute concerns Loutolim and Borim’s khazan lands. Khazans are not ordinary vacant fields. They are centuries-old, interconnected agro-pisciculture systems sustained through bunds, sluice gates, tidal channels and the controlled movement of saline and freshwater. Rice cultivation, fishing, vegetables grown along the bunds and the maintenance of water channels form part of one living ecological and livelihood system. The petitioners claim that more than 1.57 lakh square metres—around 40 per cent of the originally proposed acquisition—consists of khazan land. The government’s position, however, is that only one survey number contains khazan land and that the affected portion is approximately 1.41 per cent. That difference cannot be treated as a minor disagreement. Before any CRZ clearance is granted, the government must publicly map the bridge alignment against the official Coastal Zone Management Plan, khazan boundaries, bunds, sluice gates, tidal channels, bridge piers, embankments, ramps, construction yards and temporary access areas. The impact cannot be measured only by calculating the land occupied by bridge pillars. Filling, embankments, machinery movement, casting yards and altered drainage could obstruct water circulation and damage fields situated far beyond the acquired strip. The petition also raises questions about private forest land, dense tree cover and a possible forest corridor in Queula and Borim. Environmental documents reportedly contemplated the removal of approximately 4,875 trees. Once mature forest is felled, a later judgment cannot restore the canopy, groundwater recharge, soil stability, wildlife movement and microclimate that have been lost. Another major contradiction concerns the existing Borim bridge. The government has approved more than ₹20 crore for its strengthening and rehabilitation, reportedly extending its life by another 20 years. Yet the petitioners argue that the traffic calculations for the new bridge effectively ignored the continued availability of the repaired structure. What traffic will the old bridge carry? What traffic will be transferred to the new bridge? Will the new alignment primarily serve ordinary commuters, or will its principal function be to carry heavy freight towards Verna, Vasco and Mormugao Port?