Daijiworld Media Network - Mapusa

Mapusa, Nov 21: In a significant decision welcomed by the legal fraternity and local residents, the government has postponed the relocation of Mapusa courts to the new Merces complex by one year. The move comes after sustained opposition over severe traffic concerns arising from the ongoing Porvorim highway construction.

The proposed shift originally planned for the end of December faced resistance from lawyers and citizens who argued that relocating during a period of infrastructural disruption would worsen accessibility for litigants, lawyers and daily visitors.

Mapusa MLA Joshua D’Souza took up the matter with chief minister Pramod Sawant, following a meeting between a lawyers’ delegation and Calangute MLA Michael Lobo, Siolim MLA Delilah Lobo, and advocate general Devidas Pangam.

Advocate Shashank Narvekar, part of the delegation, recalled that nearly 15 years ago three courts — a fast-track court and two district courts — were shifted from Panaji to Mapusa to ease judicial processes. “Parking issues alone cannot justify shifting courts to Merces,” he said. He further noted that the government currently spends ?4 lakh a month on rent for the existing premises, a cost he termed minimal compared to the hardship lawyers and litigants would face if the courts were moved amidst traffic chaos.

The government’s one-year deferment will now be used to explore long-term infrastructure solutions. The Mapusa Advocates Forum has proposed constructing a multi-storey complex on the available 1,000 sqm plot behind the old heritage court building.

Forum president advocate Paresh Rao said the proposed structure would include judges’ quarters, courtrooms for both district and civil courts, and a multi-level parking facility. The existing courts currently manage around 800 cases and see nearly 2,000 visitors daily. According to the forum, the suggested site is adequate to accommodate all eight civil courts as well as district courts, offering a permanent and practical solution to Mapusa’s judicial infrastructure needs.