TRUTH AND TRUE FACTS OF SOUTO MAIOR CASE brought to you by Bebdo

Mogal Nizgoenkarano, see for yourself how the truth is hidden away from Goa and Goans by the priests, the politicians, the media and the builders. But as Oliver Goldsmith said, “A lie never lives to be old”, here the lies of all these CHORS are exposed.

It is the poor and middle class Goans who suffer and will continue to suffer as long as they eat the bread crumbs of the corrupt 40 chors and their arse lickers. At this rate, it won’t be long to see a lot of our dear poor and middle class Goans sleeping on the streets of our cities and towns without a roof on their heads.

This was published in faraway Daman as no Goan newspaper wanted to publish it despite giving all the proofs of the case. Most of them said it is against their management policy to do so

By Leslie St. Anne 11 March 1-15, 2007

UTS’ VOICE www.utsvoice.net

“Without the permission of their Ordinary, Clerics are neither to become Agents for goods belonging to Lay Persons nor assume secular offices which entail an obligation to render accounts; they are forbidden to act as Surety, even on behalf of their own goods, without consultation with their proper Ordinary; they are likewise to refrain from signing promissory notes whereby they undertake the obligation to pay an amount of money without any determined reason.” Canon 285 § 4.

“Canon 286 – Clerics are forbidden personally or through others to conduct business or trade either for their own benefit or that of others without the permission of legitimate ecclesiastical authority.”

Citing Canon Law to strengthen their cause a group of farmers at Mitra-Caranzalem Taleigao, a suburb of Panjim,are engaged in a war of attrition with the Archdiocese of Goa in a bid to save their traditional ‘cultivable’ paddy fields from being ravaged by private builders and real-estate developers.

The farmers united under the banner ‘Conego Souto-Maior Caranzalem Farmlands People’s Association’ (CSMCFPA) assert that the Archdiocese had no right to ‘sell’ the lands, which, the former claim-through a ‘Will’ made in March 1736, the late Fr.Francisco da Cunha Souto Maior-had stipulated that various of his landed property that had vested in ‘Our Lady of Rosary Chapel’ at Caranzalem be specifically used for the benefit of the villagers of Caranzalem-Taleigao. The late Canon Souto Maior, one learns, was clear in his Will that these ‘private Chapel’ lands would not be sold ‘till the sun rises in the West’ and that the Propriedade de Mitra Patriarcal de Goa, or, simply put, the Archdiocese of Goa would, upon his (Souto Maior) death, be entrusted as ‘protector’ in a supervisory or administrative capacity.

Says John Fernandes of the Farmlands People Association, “The late Rev.Conego de Souto-Maior, had bequeathed his worldly assets / properties in such a way that we (farmers of Caranzalem-(Taleigao) through our ancestors, were contemplated as the real beneficiaries for our temporal growth and material uplift,conducive to spiritual well being”.

The Souto Maior lands (mainly paddy fields) according to the Farmlands People Association had been tilled for centuries by their ancestors who contributed part of the produce to the ‘Our Lady of Rosary Chapel’. They allege that these properties were wrongly administered by the Archbishop of Goa and his agents under the misnomer of ‘Mitra Properties’ which was prejudicial to the interests of the intended beneficiaries.

The Caranzalem farmers’ fears did not always fall on deaf ears. Championing their cause was former Chaplain Fr.Simpliciano N.Fernandes, who helped organise the parishioners into a ‘Cofre’ (Council) -a representative Body acceptable to the Archbishop-for discussion of the Chapel affairs. Fr. Fernandes in the Chapel news bulletin “Khobrampotr”, of May, 1993, expressed doubts over the title of the properties.

Said he, “I took up digging into the past on my own. Till today I cannot say how these assets are owned by the Archdiocese under the title “Mitra de Caranzalem”.

The Priest’s sincere efforts to raise the Chapel to a Church status and unearth the truth about the Souto Maior properties apparently did not go down well with the Archdiocese. Frustrated, he had to resign and was transferred. As a Parthian Shot Fr.Fernandes in the “Khobrampotr” bulletin expressed distress over the functioning of a convent school run by nuns on the Holy Rosary Chapel properties.

Said he, “They were brought here and given this house and land of the Chaplain only for use in order to educate the poor on this land free of cost (now they are said to demand donations even from the poor) to work for the Chapel and to practice charity to the people here. Now they are doing nothing of this but are only busy making money and striving for name and fame of their school. No wonder, this School meant for the poor is now catering for the children of the rich and the deputationists!”

In October 1993, the residents of Mitra–Caranzalem woke up to a grim reality. They learnt that the Church authorities had decided to hand over-prime cultivable land that had been their livelihood as tenants through the centuries-along the Panjim – Dona Paula road to private developers and builders. Most of the fields were in the jurisdiction of the roadside Rosary Chapel and part of Father Francisco da Cunha Souto Maior’s estate now administered as “Mitra de Caranzalem” by the Archdiocese of Goa. Agitated over the intended act of the Church a group of environment conscious citizens repeatedly complained to the Archbishop of Goa through several letters but to no avail.

Instead to their chagrin, the poor villagers learnt that the Church had succumbed to the astuteness of the Builder lobby by selling large tracts of land to the latter. Tenants on the land, too, have been coerced into giving up their livelihood, with offers of bulk payments and flats in the proposed Commercial-cum-Residential Complexes.

The Conego Souto-Maior Caranzalem Farmland People’s Association claim that the Archdiocese of Goa has sold sizable chunks of prime land to three builders at throwaway prizes. They allege that perks from such transactions are been reaped by some of the Priests that are negotiating the deal.

The CSMCFP Association’s fears may not be unfounded. In June 1994, the then Archbishop Patriach of Goa and Daman, Raul Nicholau Gonsalves executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of Father Victor Conceicao Rodrigues, with the rider “ provided that any powers reserved by the Codex Juris Canonicis (Code of Canon Law) to the Archbishop only in such capacity and that cannot be delegated, are not included in the present Power of Attorney (sic) with regard to the administration of temporal goods and assets , movable and immovable property of the Archdiocese which according to Canon Law are of major importance or of extraordinary administration (alienation of stable patrimony) as regards such powers reserved to the Archdiocese (sic) the powers of the Attorney Fr.Victor will be of execution only including on the financial administration.”

Armed with this Power of Attorney, Fr. Victor Rodrigues executed another Power of Attorney in April 1997 delegating powers (contrary to the practice of Canon Law?) to a layman, Mr.Peter Vaz (who one understands is a builder) to act on various matters of the Archdiocese pertaining to obtaining building permissions, agreement of sales, appearing before quasi-legal bodies, etc. with regard to land-shown in the Survey records as ‘Predio da Mitra’ or “ Predio Caranzalem’ and land admeasuring around 8268 sq metres bearing Chalta No.25 of PT sheet no 162 of City Survey Panjim situated at Caranzalem of Ilhas Taluka. This Power of Attorney was reportedly given to Vaz so as to overcome bureaucratic hurdles in processing plans for building and development activity on the Church properties.

On June 26th 1992, the Archdiocese of Goa through its lawful Attorney the Procurator, Fr.Roque Barreto, had entered into an Agreement for Sale with M/s Alfran Constructions to sell the ‘Caranzalem’ lands popularly known as ‘Caranzalem Shet’ surveyed under 282/2 of Taleigao village.

The Archdiocese, mindful of the land being tenanted, had, in apparent collusion with the some of the farmers approached the Mamlatdar of Tiswadi, so as to ensure a smooth sale, by seeking the declaration of their( farmers) tenancy under Section 7 and thereafter sanction u/s 18k of the Agricultural Tenancy Act 1964 read with rule 6 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy (Special Rights and Privileges) Rules 1977 to have the field transferred by sale to the opponent-in this case the Archdiocese.

Acting on the Application the Mamlatdar of Tiswadi vide his Order dated 28th April 1992 granted the deemed tenants-the heirs of the original tenant late Inacio Martins permission to transfer by sale the ‘Caranzalem Shet’ for a price as decided and mentioned by the Applicants in this case the tenants. This Order, claim the CSMC Farmlands Association was bad in law as the Mamlatdar of Tiswadi ‘had no authority of law nor jurisdiction while entertaining an application for declaration of any person as tenant in terms of Section 7 of the Tenancy Act in question nor to pass an order in terms of 18k in favour of the opponent itself’.

The brown mud filling forms an ugly foreground for the green agricultural activity seen at Caranzalem.

‘fresh’ Agreement of Sale, the earlier one, How such permissions to construct on

The Archdiocese, mindful of the land being tenanted, had, in apparent collusion with the some of the farmers approached the Mamlatdar of Tiswadi, so as to ensure a smooth sale, by seeking the declaration of their( farmers) tenancy under Section 7 and thereafter sanction u/s 18k of the Agricultural Tenancy Act 1964 read with rule 6 of the Goa, Daman Tenancy Revision Application No.50/96, the Honourable Administrative Tribunal held on 25/7/1996 that ‘there was no jurisdiction nor authority to the Mamlatdar of Tiswadi Taluka to entertain any application or pass any judgement and order in terms of Tenancy Act in question as no such officer was appointed in terms of section 2(15) of the Tenancy Act 1964 to carry out the functions and duties of a Mamlatdar constituted under the said Tenancy Act.’

Having ‘bought off’ the rights of the tenants, the Archdiocese of Goa undeterred by the protests of the CSMS Farmlands Peoples Association, went ahead with its plans to ‘sell’ the prime agricultural lands at ‘Mitra-Caranzalem’. On March 11th 2004, the Archdiocese of Goa, through its lawful Attorney, Rev. Fr. Arlino De Mello, entered into another on the plot. As M/s Alfran Construction Pvt.Ltd was also made a party to the ‘fresh’ Agreement of Sale, the earlier one, made in 1992 was nullified. Once again the Archbishop through his lawful Attorney Fr. Arlino De Mello executed a Power of Attorney in favour of a layman, Dayaneshwar Govekar, Director of M/s Scholar Builders Pvt.Ltd to act on behalf of the Archdiocese in all matters pertaining to the development of the ‘Church’ land admeasuring 8,995 sq metres, popularly known as the ‘Caranzalem Shet’.

With the second Agreement and Power of Attorney in hand, the Builders\Developers wasted no time in obtaining the necessary permissions, licences, and approvals from the Government authorities. Approvals from the Town and Country Planning Department, North Goa Planning and Development Authority and Directorate of Health Service were obtained, paving the way for a Construction Licence from the Village Panchayat of Taleigao on February 4th 2006. Permission to fill the land from the TCP Department and ‘Conversion Sanad’ from the Office of the Collector, North Goa District was also secured. How such permissions to construct on ‘tenanted Agricultural lands’ and paddy fields were so easily granted –especially as a High Court ruling in July 2000 was particularly stringent over use of Agricultural land-is anybody’s guess?

The Honourable High Court Bench comprising Justices F. Rebello and V.C.Daga had in an oral ruling held that ‘Agricultural land cannot be used for any purpose other than Agriculture’ and ‘the transfer of land under Section 18K can only be permitted for the use of land for Agriculture purpose and no other purpose’.

Justices Rebello and Daga were specific over the fact that ‘green areas /green belts are no longer the exclusive domain of the owner of the property. Protection of environment is part of the duty cast on the Government of the day. Every resident of the State has the right for protection of these green areas as part of their right to life. It is the duty of the State to protect the green areas constituting agricultural land whether tenanted or non-tenanted as also forests. In these circumstances we have issued direction to the Town and Country Planning Board not to consider any case for conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural even if the land is zoned as settlement in the regional plan.

As an exception, only individuals can apply for conversion of land already zoned as settlement if area is not more that 1000 square metres for construction of their residential houses.’ The High Court ruling notwithstanding, the Developers, Scholar Builders Pvt. Ltd -equipped with all the required licences began land filling operations of the ‘Caranzalem Shet’ in real earnest only to reveal another ‘shocking’ fact!

The Archdiocese of Goa had already sold a small part of the plot -an area of 49 sq metres-to one of the tenant farmers Caetano Menino Joao Fernandes vide a Sale Deed made on 16th November of 1992 which was signed by Fr. Roque Barreto as Procurator of the Archdiocese. Astounded by the convoy of trucks filling up the fields in their backyard next to their residential home, the family of Caetano Menino Fernandes as would be expected confronted the builder. To their disbelief they learnt that the Archdiocese of Goa had entered into an Agreement of Sale for the entire ‘8895’ quare metres of ‘Caranzalem Shet’prime cultivable agricultural land-to M/s Scholar Builders Pvt.Ltd without mention of the 49 square metres of area already sold to Menino Fernandes -ample proof of which was the DEED OF SALE made in 1992!

Instead of heeding to Caetano Fernandes’s plea to stop the work until matters could be sorted out, the Builder, D.Govekar, instead filed a police complaint No.282/2, only the ‘Propriedade de Mitra

Patriarcal de Goa’ (Archdiocese of Goa) is shown as occupant. The record of 49 square metres sold to Caetano Fernandes or that of the original tenant Inacio Martins have been deleted!

Determined to save his land-on which he has been eking out a modest sustenance through agricultural activity – an aggrieved Caetano Menino Joao Fernandes has filed an appeal before the

Collector North Goa. Fernandes could prove the farmer’s David versus the Builder’s Goliath! Panjim and to the Archbishop of Goa.

Ironically, if one may recall it was the Church’s overt support to the Goa Bachao Abhiyan ( Save Goa Campaign) launched early this year that was the turning point in the Government decision to scrap the Regional Plan 2011 which would have entailed much destruction of ‘agricultural and forest’ land.

The Conego Souto-Maior Caranzalem Farmland Peoples’ Association have appealed to the Archdiocese of Goa to let wiser counsel prevail and restore the ‘Caranzalem Shet’ to its original use.

Statement about the ownership and other particulars about newspaper entitled UTS’ VOICE as required to be published in the first issue of everyyear after the last day of March.

Form IV (See Rule 8)

1. Name of Publication: UTS’ VOICE

2. Place of Publication: 9, Vivek, Jetty Road, Daman (UT) -396 210

3. Periodicity of Publication: Fortnightly

4. Printer’s Name: Amal Das

NIZ GOENKAR ADDS: How far can our Goan clergy go is beyond the understanding of the common man or the faithfull of Goa.