Goa Foundation’s persistent PIL action leads to restoration of hill at Arpora
The High Court of Bombay at Goa has brought to a close a four-year-long legal battle over the illegal cutting of a hill at Arpora, after the hill was finally restored to a stable condition.
The case, P.I.L. W.P. No. 20/2022 — Goa Foundation v. Village Panchayat of Arpora-Nagoa & Ors., began with a citizen complaint and ended with the restoration of the damaged hill. The matter is an important example of how citizen action, sustained over several years through the courts, can secure actual environmental relief even when the authorities initially fail to act.
The Goa Foundation first complained to the Village Panchayat on 31 March 2022, after observing hill-cutting and development activity behind the Park Regis Hotel at Arpora. Heavy machinery was being used to cut the hill. The Foundation pointed out that the land was shown in the Regional Plan as a No Development Slope, where such activity could not lawfully be undertaken.
The Panchayat did not stop the work. Instead, it told the Foundation that it could not act because the complaint had not identified the person responsible.
With the hill-cutting continuing, the Foundation approached the High Court on 12 April 2022. The very next day, the Court directed the Flying Squad to immediately stop the activity.
A subsequent inspection by the North Goa Planning and Development Authority (NGPDA) revealed the scale of the damage. The hill had been cut vertically by approximately 4–5 metres over a length of about 100 metres, and horizontally by around 30 metres. Excavation had also been carried out for a road approximately six metres wide, involving cuts of another 2–3 metres.
The authorities subsequently found that the hill-cutting had been carried out without the permission required under Section 17-A of the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974.
The High Court also took the authorities to task for their failure to act on their own. In its order of 6 September 2022, the Court described the NGPDA’s explanation for its earlier inaction as a “highly lame and insensitive plea”, observing that authorities responsible for preventing illegal hill-cutting could not wait for complaints before acting. The Court also criticised the Village Panchayat for evading responsibility.
On 20 September 2022, the NGPDA held that the hill-cutting violated Section 17-A and directed restoration of the hill to its original condition. The following day, the Village Panchayat revoked the construction licence and similarly directed restoration.
On 4 October 2022, the High Court admitted the petition and made it clear that no fresh application for hill-cutting permission could be entertained until the site had been restored. Further construction was also restrained.
Four years of persistence to ensure genuine restoration
Obtaining an order for restoration, however, was only the beginning.
Over the next four years, the Goa Foundation continued to monitor the restoration through repeated site inspections, discussions with the Town Planning Department, technical experts and the private party.
In January 2024, the Court rejected an attempt to claim that the hill had already been restored, noting that the work had been undertaken without the involvement or technical input of the Town Planning Department. The private party then undertook to prepare a scientifically based restoration proposal.
The Foundation continued to insist that restoration had to be genuine and technically adequate, rather than merely cosmetic.
Ultimately, in October 2025, the Town Planning Department engaged the Goa Engineering College (GEC) to determine scientifically how the hill should be restored. GEC submitted its recommendations in January 2026. The private party subsequently carried out further restoration in accordance with those recommendations.
In its report dated 29 June 2026, GEC found that the slope had been restored to a stable condition and that the restoration works complied with its technical recommendations.
When the matter came before the High Court on 24 August 2026, the Court recorded that the primary relief sought by the petition — restoration of the hill — had been achieved and disposed of the petition.
The Goa Foundation says the case demonstrates the importance of citizen vigilance and sustained environmental litigation.
The hill was not restored because the authorities acted promptly when the illegal cutting began. It was restored because a citizen-led environmental organisation noticed the damage, complained, approached the Court when the complaint was ignored, and then remained involved for more than four years until the restoration was independently verified as adequate.
The Foundation hopes that the case will serve as a reminder that environmental laws cannot be effectively enforced if authorities wait for citizens to point out every violation. At the same time, it demonstrates that persistent citizen action can make a real difference: environmental litigation need not end with an order — it can result in the actual restoration of damaged natural resources.
Anthony de Souza
Executive Director
Goa Foundation