JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) These are appeals by way of special leave under Article 136 of the
Constitution against the orders of the Bombay High Court at Goa dismissing
Civil Writ Petition No. 253 of 1999 and Civil Review Petition No. 17 of
2000.
(2.) The facts very briefly are that the respondent no. 8 was served with
a show-cause notice dated 26.11.1996 by the North Goa Planning and
Development Authority (for short 'the Authority'). In the show-cause
notice, it was alleged that the respondent no. 8 had constructed a
residential bungalow on a land in Survey No.250/12 without the prior
permission of the Authority as required under Section 44 of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1974 (for short 'the Act'). It was also alleged in
the show-cause notice that there was no proper access road to the property
as required under the Act and that the construction was within a distance
of 100 Mtrs. from Zuari river and was in breach of the Coastal Regulation
Zone notification issued under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. By
the show-cause notice, the respondent no.8 was asked to show-cause why
action should not be initiated under Section 52 of the Act for demolition
of the construction. By a communication dated 10.12.1996, the Town Planner
of the Authority also informed the Chief Officer, Panaji Municipal Council,
that the respondent no. 8 had obtained permission from the Municipal
Council to make the construction on the land in Survey No. 250/12, Village
Taleigao, by misrepresenting the facts and, therefore, the permission may
be revoked. Thereafter, a notice dated 18.11.1997 was issued by the
Municipal Council to the respondent no. 8 directing him to stop the
construction work immediately and to show-cause why the licence granted to
him for the construction of the building on the land in Survey. No. 250/12
of Taleigao Village should not be revoked.
(3.) The appellant also filed Writ Petition No. 253 of 1999 before the Bombay
High Court at Goa alleging that the structure made by the respondent no. 8
on the land in Survey No.250/12 in Village Taleigao contravenes the
provisions of the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification dated 19.02.1991
inasmuch as it was within 100 Mtrs. from the river Zuari in Costal
Regulation Zone (CRZ) III area. The High Court called for a report from
the Director of National Institute of Oceanography after inspection of the
property of the respondent no.8 and a Senior Technical Officer of the
National Institute of Oceanography submitted a report dated 24.01.2000
saying that the structure in question was not within 100 Mtrs. of the High
Tide Line (HTL). After perusing the report, the High Court dismissed the
writ petition by order dated 29.01.2000;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.