PERPET ASSIS RODRIGUES Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri A. D. Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. Salkar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Shri Shahapurkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent no.4.

(2.) THE above Petition seeks to challenge the Order dated 15/18.12.2008, passed by the Respondent no.2, whereby by virtue of the powers delegated under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, the Petitioner was directed to demolish the structure within 30 days from the date of the receipt of the Order. The disputed structure is located in the property surveyed under no. 180/2 of Arambol Village, admeasuring an area of 50 square metres approximately allegedly located within 200 metres from the High Tide Line.

(3.) ON the other hand, Shri M. Salkar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondent nos. 1 to 3, pointed out that in view of the statement of the Secretary of the Respondent no.4, it clearly establishes that the said documents sought to be relied by the Petitioner are fabricated and are not genuine, as according to him, the Secretary himself has disclosed that the said documents are not available in the records of the Panchayat. Learned Counsel further pointed out that in view of the said statement, the Respondent no. 2 had no other alternative then to take adverse inference with regard to the genuineness of the said document and pass the impugned Order. Learned Counsel further submits that considering that such documents are not genuine and not found in the records of the Respondent no.4, the Respondent no. 2 was justified to pass the impugned Order. Learned Counsel further submits that taking note of the fact that the disputed structure is within two hundred metres from the High Tide Line and as the Petitioner has failed to establish the legality of such construction, the Respondent no.2 was justified to pass the impugned Order.