Latest news with #2016Act
News18
08-08-2025
- Politics
- News18
Goa assembly clears to bill to regularise unauthorised houses on community lands
Panaji, Aug 8 (PTI) The Goa assembly passed a bill aimed at regularising certain categories of unauthorised constructions on comunidade lands amid strong protests from the opposition, which claimed that the legislation will benefit non-Goans. The Goa Regularisation of Unauthorised Construction (Amendment) Bill, 2025, was passed on Thursday night, with the House being adjourned twice after the opposition benches created a pandemonium. Comunidade land refers to a system of communal land ownership and management in Goa, where land is collectively held by a community and governed by its members. The bill, moved by state Revenue Minister Atanasio Monserrate, amends the 2016 Act to widen the scope for regularising certain categories of illegal constructions, including those on comunidade lands. The legislation introduces provisions allowing the regularisation of houses built on comunidade and government lands if these have already been regularised under relevant land laws by competent authorities. The permissible built-up area for regularisation has been allowed to 500 sq metres in village panchayat areas and 600 sq metres in municipal areas, subject to floor area ratio norms of the respective regions. The opposition benches argued that the government was attempting to regularise illegal constructions, especially of non-Goans. The opposition MLAs walked into the well of the House, forcing Speaker Ramesh Tawadkar to adjourn the proceedings twice for 10 minutes and five minutes, respectively. Opposition MLAs also staged a sit-in protest outside the assembly complex after the session was over. Talking to reporters after the passage of the bill, Chief Minister Pramod Sawant said that the legislation will benefit 35,000 houses, of which 30,000 structures belong to Goans. He said houses that completed 15 years as of February 28, 2014, will be eligible for regularisation only after receiving consent from the respective comunidade bodies and paying fines. Sawant said the bill was drafted after several orders from the Goa Bench of Bombay High Court and the National Green Tribunal feared demolition of houses that were as old as 40 years. 'The government's intention is clear that Goans should benefit from the bill," he said, adding that beneficiaries should apply within 30 days, and a special officer would be appointed to oversee the process. PTI RPS ARU view comments First Published: August 08, 2025, 09:00 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hindustan Times
08-08-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Goa assembly clears to bill to regularise unauthorised houses on community lands
Panaji, The Goa assembly passed a bill aimed at regularising certain categories of unauthorised constructions on comunidade lands amid strong protests from the opposition, which claimed that the legislation will benefit non-Goans. Goa assembly clears to bill to regularise unauthorised houses on community lands The Goa Regularisation of Unauthorised Construction Bill, 2025, was passed on Thursday night, with the House being adjourned twice after the opposition benches created a pandemonium. Comunidade land refers to a system of communal land ownership and management in Goa, where land is collectively held by a community and governed by its members. The bill, moved by state Revenue Minister Atanasio Monserrate, amends the 2016 Act to widen the scope for regularising certain categories of illegal constructions, including those on comunidade lands. The legislation introduces provisions allowing the regularisation of houses built on comunidade and government lands if these have already been regularised under relevant land laws by competent authorities. The permissible built-up area for regularisation has been allowed to 500 sq metres in village panchayat areas and 600 sq metres in municipal areas, subject to floor area ratio norms of the respective regions. The bill makes it mandatory for the applicant to get consent from the respective comunidade bodies by paying them relevant fines. The opposition benches argued that the government was attempting to regularise illegal constructions, especially of non-Goans. The opposition MLAs walked into the well of the House, forcing Speaker Ramesh Tawadkar to adjourn the proceedings twice for 10 minutes and five minutes, respectively. Opposition MLAs also staged a sit-in protest outside the assembly complex after the session was over. Talking to reporters after the passage of the bill, Chief Minister Pramod Sawant said that the legislation will benefit 35,000 houses, of which 30,000 structures belong to Goans. He said houses that completed 15 years as of February 28, 2014, will be eligible for regularisation only after receiving consent from the respective comunidade bodies and paying fines. Sawant said the bill was drafted after several orders from the Goa Bench of Bombay High Court and the National Green Tribunal feared demolition of houses that were as old as 40 years. "The government's intention is clear that Goans should benefit from the bill," he said, adding that beneficiaries should apply within 30 days, and a special officer would be appointed to oversee the process. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
The Hindu
14-07-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Karnataka High Court notice to BBMP on plea to maintain footpaths in disable-friendly condition
The High Court of Karnataka on Monday ordered issue of notice to the State government and the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) on a PIL petition, which has sought a direction to the authorities to ensure that the footpaths and roads in the city are maintained in strict compliance with the requirements of the Persons with Disability (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 2016. A division bench comprising acting Chief Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice C.M. Joshi passed the order on the petition filed by Letzkit Foundation, a city-based NGO. It has been pointed out that even in places where the footpaths are properly laid in central parts of the city, they are not user friendly, particularly for the physically challenged persons. The 2016 Act emphasises the creation of a barrier-free environment, which includes accessible footpaths, the creation of a barrier-free environment, which includes accessible footpaths, for physically challenged persons, it has been stated in the petition. Obstructions galore Also, the petitioner has pointed out that there are large number of encroachment of footpaths across the city and at many places the residents have used the footpaths in front of their compound walls for gardening, either permanent in nature or by placing large flower pots with large flower bearing plants. It has also been complained in the petition that despite several directions issued by the court on clearing encroachments of footpaths in other PIL petitions earlier, the authorities have failed to keep the footpaths and streets free from obstructions.
Hindustan Times
10-07-2025
- Health
- Hindustan Times
SC notice on plea to include haemophilia under disability job reservation
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Union government to respond to a petition that sought reservation in public employment to persons with haemophilia, a blood clotting deficiency. The Supreme Court issued notice to the Union government and UPSC, as the petitioner urged the court to direct UPSC to consider him as a disabled candidate (ANI) The petition filed by Prema Ram, a person with haemophilia, argued that such persons face locomotor disability as internal bleeding in joints causes limb deformity, which can become severe in some cases. The petitioner, who has a benchmark disability certified with 50% disability of haemophilia, said that people with the blood disorder were not eligible for reservation in government jobs under the Right to Persons with Disabilities Act. 'We will issue notice,' the bench of justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi, sitting during the partial court working days, said. Prema Ram had appeared in the Civil Services Examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) in May this year. But because people with the blood disorder were not eligible for the quota, he did not tick his eligibility under the 'persons with disability' category. The bench issued notice to the Union government and UPSC, as the petitioner urged the court to direct UPSC to consider him as a disabled candidate. Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Jayna Kothari said that haemophilia is linked to locomotor disability as a person having this rare genetic blood disorder cannot walk if there is uncontrolled bleeding in joints. She pointed out that the petitioner has a valid disability certificate issued in 2018 of having benchmark disability (over 40% disability) with severe haemophilia. Espousing the cause of similarly-situated persons, the petition filed as a public interest litigation, referred to section 34 of the 2016 Act or the RPD Act. Section 34 of this Act provides for 4% reservation in public employment to persons with benchmark disability under a list of 21 specified disabilities. This does not include haemophilia, the petition said. The court said, 'If you have a locomotor disability, you will get it. We do not see any challenge to this. Reservation can be as per the legislation. You cannot make it equal for everybody.' Kothari said that haemophilia is included as a 'specified disability' under the Schedule of the RPD Act, and the benefit of reservation should apply equally to all persons with benchmark disability. According to her, under the scope of Section 34, locomotor disability is available only for 'cerebral palsy, leprosy cured, dwarfism, acid attack victims and muscular dystrophy.' The petition pointed out haemophilia is an incurable blood disorder caused by a deficiency in clotting factors, specifically factor VIII (Haemophilia A) or factor IX (Haemophilia B). Bleeding in critical areas like the brain, throat, and abdomen can be life-threatening and treatment for this condition involves high costs and limited availability of treatment. In such a scenario, reservation would stand to benefit these persons in the long run. 'individuals with severe haemophilia (A or B), bearing a 'benchmark disability' of 40% or more, do not qualify for reservation benefits under Section 34 despite being covered under the definition of 'person with benchmark disability'. This contrasts starkly with individuals suffering from other disabilities such as autism and locomotor disabilities, who, with a 40% or greater disability, are entitled to reservations under the same section,' the petition drafted by advocate Rohit Sharma said.
Hindustan Times
17-06-2025
- Health
- Hindustan Times
HC refuses relief to civil services aspirant seeking appointment from disability quota
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Monday disposed off a petition filed by a person with disability, seeking retrospective appointment to the civil services based on his performance in the 2008 examination. He alleged that he was denied reservation due to his mental disability. Holding that the selection process was valid, the court stated that it could not grant relief to the petitioner based on his marks from the 2006-2008 selection process. The petitioner said that upon a literal interpretation or rather misinterpretation of the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, reservations for persons with disabilities were provided only for 3% of the posts. Further, the posts identified were for only those suffering from blindness or low vision, hearing impairment, and locomotor disability or Cerebral Palsy. No posts were identified for those suffering from any mental illnesses. The petitioner stated that he was afflicted by obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), which is considered a mental disability within the meaning assigned under Section 2(s) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (2016 Act). He pleaded that despite him suffering from mental illness, he could not apply to the posts reserved for persons with disabilities in the selection process. Therefore, he applied to be considered against the posts reserved for the OBC category. In the examination held in 2008, the petitioner secured 1110 out of 2300 marks. However, he could not get a position under the OBC category. He stated that the last candidate selected in the category reserved for persons with disabilities had secured only 991 marks out of 2300. 'If posts were to be identified and reserved for those suffering mental illness, then he would have certainly secured a position in the civil services in the year 2008 itself,' the petition stated. Citing a 2013 judgment passed by the Delhi high court, the petitioner argued that the definition of 'person with disability' includes a person suffering from mental illness. He contended that the exclusion of those suffering from mental illnesses rendered the provisions of the 1995 Act arbitrary and unconstitutional due to the vice of under inclusiveness. The 2016 Act came into force, which legislatively redressed the petitioner's concerns by expanding the definition of disability and included mental illness, autism spectrum disorder, intellectual disability, specific learning disabilities, and others, which were not covered under the 1995 Act. Based on the changed legal position under the 2016 Act, the petitioner represented to the central government and the Department of Disabilities that he should be appointed to the Civil Services based upon his performance in the 2006–2008 selection process. However, his representations were rejected by a communication dated July 5, 2018, and February 27, 2019. He was informed that no changes could now be made to the selection process that had concluded in 2008. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner approached the Bombay high court on April 1, 2019. However, observing that the grant of relief would lead to administrative chaos, the division bench of justice MS Sonak and justice Jitendra Jain disposed off the petition. It noted that his appointment at this point of time will give rise to several complications regarding seniority, induction, etc. 'The petitioner's case was fairly and sympathetically considered but the authorities quite correctly found it difficult to grant the petitioner relief that he was seeking at this point of time,' it concluded.
