Panaji: The directorate of panchayat (DoP) dismissed the petition challenging the Arpora-Nagoa panchayat’s order to demolish the structure of the nightclub Birch by Romeo Lane, where 25 persons died in a fire on Dec 6, 2025. It directed the Arpora-Nagoa panchayat to demolish the structure.“The present appeal is dismissed. The order-cum-demolition notice dated April 20, 2024, issued by the panchayat hereby stands upheld. The direction given by my predecessor to maintain status quo or stay for demolition in the present appeal proceedings stands vacated. The appeal accordingly stands disposed of. The panchayat is directed to take steps in accordance with law to demolish the structures,” additional panchayat director Joao Fernandes said in the order.The demolition order issued by panchayat was challenged by property owner and UK national Surinder Kumar Khosla.Khosla challenged the demolition order on the grounds that it was bad in law, vague, without application of mind, did not consider the reply filed, did not provide the site inspection report, ignored permissions and NOCs, including repair permissions dated March 25, 2023, trade licences, house tax receipts, and that no opportunity of hearing was given.Khosla contended that, having granted permissions, the panchayat could not subsequently say the structures lacked valid permissions. He had stated that substantial investments were made and house tax and electricity charges continued to be paid. He denied the existence of any salt pan and contended the panchayat acted under pressure from complainants in collusion.The panchayat submitted that the appeal was devoid of merit both in law and on facts and was liable to be dismissed. The panchayat acted in accordance with the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, in discharging its statutory duty to prevent and remove unauthorised constructions.The panchayat said that the Khosla failed to produce documents proving legality despite ample opportunities; hence, the demolition order was passed.The panchayat submitted that Khosla failed to produce sanctioned building plans, occupancy certificates, or necessary approvals. The documents relied upon did not prove the legality of the structures.“There is no evidence whatsoever that the structures were originally constructed after obtaining the requisite permissions under Section 66 of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Since there is no permission for construction to begin with, there cannot be any case made out for repair of the structures,” Fernandes said.“It is a matter of record that an unfortunate incident occurred at one of the subject structures on Dec 6, 2025. This incident demonstrates that the structures constitute a health hazard and pose risks to public safety. The structures lack clearances from the perspective of fire safety, discharge of sewage, and compliance with other statutory requirements. On this count also, the structures need to be demolished at the earliest in the interest of public safety and health,” Fernandes said.He said that, under the guise of repairs, entirely new structures appeared to be erected without plans and permissions.Fernandes said that it was evident from the record that the said constructions were illegal and were constructed without any permissions.“The record demonstrates that the Appellant put up structures, namely shops, a restaurant, 6 structures, and 2 platforms, in a salt pan without obtaining permission from the authorities as required under Section 66 of the Panchayat Raj Act,” Fernandes said.“In view of what is recorded hereinabove, the demolition order-cum-notice dated April 20, 2024, passed by the panchayat under Section 66(4) of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, cannot be faulted. Khosla failed to prove that the structures in question were constructed after obtaining the requisite permissions under Section 66 of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The present appeal is accordingly liable to be dismissed,” additional panchayat director said.
