Goa nightclub fire: landowner says officials quietly changed property status
Pradeep Ghadi Amonkar says he learned of the zone change on December 11 while preparing to approach the High Court.
A man claiming to be the original owner of the land on which the fire-ravaged nightclub ‘Birch by Romeo Lane’ stood has alleged that officials quietly altered the property’s zoning status without his knowledge, seemingly to benefit the club’s operators. The revelation has added a new layer of controversy to the tragedy that shook North Goa earlier this month.
Pradeep Ghadi Amonkar, the landowner, told PTI that a portion of his property in Arpora village was converted from a salt pan to a settlement zone without his consent or notification. He believes this change allowed the establishment of the nightclub on the land, which would not have been permissible under the previous zoning rules.
“This land has been in my family, and for 21 years I have been fighting in courts to reclaim it after it was wrongfully occupied,” Mr. Amonkar said. He explained that he had originally signed a sale agreement with Surinder Kumar Khosla in 2004. However, the deal fell through within six months because he did not receive the payment agreed upon. Later, Khosla set up a nightclub on the land, which was eventually taken over by Saurabh and Gaurav Luthra, the owners of Birch by Romeo Lane.
Tragedy struck the nightclub at Arpora around midnight on December 6, 2025, when a fire engulfed the premises, claiming the lives of 25 people, most of them staff members and a few tourists. The devastating incident has drawn attention to safety violations, management lapses, and, now, questions over land ownership and zoning changes.
Amid the ongoing legal battle over his property, Mr. Amonkar said he recently discovered that a portion of his land had been reclassified from a salt pan to a settlement zone without any prior notice to him. He expressed shock and frustration, questioning how authorities could convert a salt pan into a settlement zone quietly, especially while litigation concerning ownership is ongoing.
“No notice was served to me regarding this change. It feels like decisions are being made behind closed doors, ignoring the rights of landowners like me.”
Mr. Amonkar emphasised that the reclassification could have significant implications. Not only does it allow construction activities that would otherwise be prohibited, but it also raises questions about whether proper due process was followed in changing the land use. he asked.
The controversy comes at a time when investigations into the fire are still ongoing, adding to the complex legal and administrative challenges surrounding the case. Local authorities are under scrutiny for safety lapses at the nightclub, including alleged overcrowding, lack of fire safety measures, and violations of building norms. Now, with claims of a zoning change without notification, the narrative has grown more complicated, intertwining property disputes with regulatory concerns.
A senior official from the Goa Town and Country Planning department said that since an inquiry into the matter is underway, it would not be appropriate to comment on Mr. Amonkar’s allegations at this stage.
The unfolding situation highlights a broader issue in Goa and other parts of India, where conflicts between private property rights, government approvals, and commercial interests can sometimes result in legal ambiguities. Landowners often find themselves entangled in prolonged litigation, while regulatory oversight and enforcement remain inconsistent.
For Mr. Amonkar, the fire has been a painful reminder of years of unresolved disputes and bureaucratic challenges. “The tragedy at the club shows that when regulations are ignored, lives are lost, and property rights are sidelined.”
While the case continues to progress in court, the landowner hopes that authorities will address both the fire tragedy and the alleged zoning irregularities. He believes that ensuring transparency in property dealings and proper enforcement of zoning laws is essential, not just for justice in his case but also to prevent future incidents that could endanger lives.
The nightclub fire has already sparked nationwide outrage and calls for stricter enforcement of safety regulations. Adding allegations of a secretive zoning change raises further questions about governance, accountability, and the responsibilities of both government officials and private operators. As investigations and court proceedings continue, the story of Arpora’s nightclub stands as a stark reminder of how property disputes, regulatory oversight, and commercial ambitions can intersect with tragic consequences.
Mr. Amonkar remains determined to reclaim his land while pursuing justice for those affected by the fire. With public attention now focused on both the fire and the legal disputes surrounding the land, the coming weeks are likely to see intense scrutiny from courts, regulators, and the media alike.