Margao property survey begins amid confusion
A door-to-door property tax assessment survey commenced in Margao, with surveyors appointed by the Goa State Urban Development Agency (GSUDA) visiting residential and commercial properties across the city to collect detailed data.
The survey is part of a state-wide geographical information system (GIS) mapping initiative to create a comprehensive digital property database for improved tax collection and municipal administration.
Survey teams are conducting detailed property assessments, including measurements, sketches, and photographs. The project targets revenue leakages in municipal areas and aims to implement capital value-based taxation methods for more accurate property assessments.
However, the exercise faced initial challenges as residents expressed confusion and doubted the veracity of the exercise and surveyors, as no adequate awareness was provided about the exercise.
Due to poor public awareness, the GSUDA-appointed surveyors faced some tough questioning at some houses they visited. The local councillors handled the situation deftly and reassured them of the survey's legitimacy.
'I got many calls from the residents of Comba, asking me if the survey was genuine. Once I explained to them that it was a govt initiative, they complied and cooperated with the surveyors,' Sagun Naik, a Councillor, said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Justice Varma to get three chances to defend himself
Justice Yashwant Varma, facing an impeachment in Parliament after an unspecified amount of money was found in his official residence following a fire, will get at least two chances to defend himself , a top-ranking official said on Friday. Justice Yashwant Varma Justice Varma will get his first opportunity after Parliament constitutes an expert committee to independently examine the case. When the probe committee decides to frame its charges against Varma, a copy of those charges will be sent to him for his reply. 'This is a part of the process that will be adopted during the impeachment of justice Verma. Just as in the case of the ethics or privileges panel, where an accused can defend themselves, in the case of impeachment motion, the judge will be allowed to present his case. Parliament has always upheld the principles of justice,' explained the official who asked not to be named. While the then Chief Justice of India sent a recommendation on justice Varma's removal, attaching the findings of a committee set up by the Supreme Court to explore the allegations against him, Parliament will have to follow its own process. Varma's second chance will come during the debate on the motion of impeachment—which can be brought either in the Rajya Sabha or the Lok Sabha. According to precedents, justice Varma will be the first speaker in the house before lawmakers debate on the merit of the case. In August 2011, Justice Soumitra Sen—who was accused of misappropriating funds—sat on a chair facing then Rajya Sabha chairman Hamid Ansari and made a lengthy argument defending himself and appealed to the MPs to vote by conscience, according to a record of the proceedings. 'The same process will follow in whichever House the impeachment motion is taken up. There will be no shortcuts,' said a second official who too asked not to be named. According to the rules, the three-member committee that will be formed by the House will comprise a Supreme Court judge, chief justice of a high cour, and a distinguished jurist. In case of Sen, the Rajya Sabha-appointed probe panel consisted of Supreme Court judge justice B Sudershan Reddy, Punjab and Haryana high court Chief Justice Mukul Mudgal and jurist Fali S. Nariman. Sen was the first judge in Independent India to be impeached in the Rajya Sabha. But he resigned before the Lok Sabha was scheduled to discuss his impeachment. In 1993, Parliament witnessed the first impeachment motion against a sitting judge when the Lok Sabha debated on the proposal to impeach Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana V Ramaswamy. The motion failed as a requisite number of MPs didn't vote. To pass an impeachment motion, the proposal has to be supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-third of the members of the House present and voting.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Time of India
Govt to soon collect signatures of MPs for motion to remove Justice Yashwant Varma
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Popular in India Prominent opposition parties have given their in-principle approval to support the motion to remove Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma and the process of collecting signatures could begin soon, Union minister Kiren Rijiju said on said the government is yet to decide whether the motion would be brought in the Lok Sabha or Rajya Lok Sabha, signatures of a minimum 100 MPs is required. For the Rajya Sabha, the requirement is the support of at least 50 said the signatures will be collected after the government decides on the House where the motion will be Monsoon session will commence from July 21 and end on August to the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the houses, the speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal (or, in popular term, impeachment) has been committee consists of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts and a "distinguished jurist."Rijiju said since the matter involves corruption in the judiciary, the government wants all political parties to be on being asked about the report of the in-committee which proved the cash discovery incident at Justice Varma 's official residence here, he said the report of the three-judge panel had not indicted Justice Varma and was meant to recommend future course of action as Parliament can only remove a judgeA fire incident at Justice Varma's residence in the national capital in March, when he was a judge at the Delhi High Court, had led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of banknotes in the the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his Sanjiv Khanna is believed to have prodded him to resign but Justice Varma dug in his apex court has since repatriated him to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial Khanna had written to the president and the prime minister, recommending the removal, which is the procedure for axing members of the higher judiciary from service.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Time of India
SBI flags Anil Ambani's RCom loan a/c as fraud
In a step that also implicates the company's former director , has moved to classify the loan account of as fraud. In a disclosure on July 1, RCom stated that SBI plans to report Ambani's name to the . Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The move sets off another round of legal contest amid the telco's ongoing insolvency proceedings. The classification traces back to a 2020 forensic audit by BDO, which prompted SBI's fraud panel to flag the account. Canara Bank had earlier declared the loan as fraud in Nov 2024, but that order was later set aside by Delhi HC. Ambani's lawyers said SBI's order was passed ex parte and in breach of natural justice. SBI tags RCom as 'fraud a/c' over alleged fund diversion MUMBAI: SBI has moved to classify the loan account of Reliance Communications as fraud, a step that implicates Anil Ambani, its former director. RCom disclosed the decision on July 1, stating that the country's largest bank plans to report Ambani to RBI. The move sets off another round of legal contest amid the telco's insolvency proceedings. The classification traces back to a 2020 forensic audit by BDO, which prompted SBI's fraud panel to flag the account. Canara Bank declared the loan as fraud in Nov 2024, but that order was later set aside by the Delhi high court. Ambani's lawyers from Agarwal Law Associates said that SBI's order was passed ex-parte and in breach of natural justice. They argued that the show-cause notices are outdated under revised RBI rules, that Ambani had no executive role in the company's operations, and that SBI failed to provide key documents needed for a reply. They called for the withdrawal of the order and asked for a personal hearing. In its latest review concluded on June 13, a committee of SBI flagged several financial irregularities. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now These included alleged diversion of Rs 12,692 crore, which was 41% of the loans of Rs 31,580 crore, to connected parties. The findings allege that sanctioned funds were misused, routed through subsidiaries to mask transactions, and used in inter-company loans that manipulated the company's books. Circular transactions involving ICDs and intraday limits were also cited as attempts to raise funds by concealing facts. RCom, which is under an NCLT-appointed resolution professional, said the classification would have "NA" impact, pointing to protections available under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. These include immunity from past actions once a resolution plan is in place. Ambani's lawyers said the SBI order defies several rulings by the Supreme Court and the Bombay high court, along with RBI norms. They said SBI ignored Ambani's objections for nearly a year and did not disclose the basis of its decision. Although similar notices were withdrawn against other non-executive and independent directors, Ambani, who held a comparable position, has been unfairly targeted, they said.
