Dismissed

Smt. Vasanti G. Naroji v. State of Goa through Its Chief Secretary and 7 Ors.

Bombay HC5 May 2014WP/280/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding illegal construction on property in Morjim, the Goa High Court held that since authorities had initiated action, no useful purpose was served in entertaining the petition. The Court rejected the plea against Panchayat inaction as civil remedies were available, thus rejecting the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition rejected.

Smt. Vasanti G. Naroji Vs State of Goa through Its Chief… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO. 280 OF 2014

¶3

SMT. VASANTI G. NAROJI ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY AND 7 ORS., ... Respondents

¶4

Shri Sebastian Vales, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. P. Bhandari, Additional Govt. Advocate for respondents No.1, 3, 4 and 8.

¶5

Coram:F. M. REIS & Z. A. HAQ, JJ. Date:5th May, 2014

¶6

P.C.:-

¶7

Heard Shri Vales, learned Counsel appearing for the

¶8

petitioner.

¶9

This petitioner takes exception to the construction activities being carried out by the respondent Nos. 5 to 7 in the property bearing survey No. 59/1 of Village Morjim. The main grievance of the petitioner is that despite of the complaints lodged by the petitioner before the local Panchayat, no action is forthcoming from the Panchayat with regard to the disputed construction. It is further pointed out that the petitioner has filed her objections before the concerned Deputy Collector and, in fact, the learned Deputy Collector had issued stop-work order. It is further submitted that despite of the stop-work order, the illegal construction activities are

¶10

¶11

going on unabted. It is further pointed out that despite of the complaints lodged by the petitioner, no action is being taken by the Statutory Authorities. The learned Counsel has also relied upon a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.90/2000 dated 12th July, 2000 in the case of Mr. Nazar da Silva and another vs. State of Goa and others.

¶12

We have examined the record, as well as heard the learned Counsel. During the course of hearing, Ms. P. Bhandari, learned Additional Govt. Advocate brought to our attention, a Notice dated 2nd May, 2014, issued by the Deputy Collector and SDO, directing that the construction in question, be stopped. It is further pointed out by the learned Additional Govt. Advocate that a fresh notice had to be issued, as earlier the petitioner had given a wrong survey number of the property.

¶13

Considering the fact that the Authorities have initiated action with regard to the construction in question, we find that no useful purpose would be served in entertaining the above writ petition, at this stage.

¶14

With regard to the contention of the petitioner that the Panchayat has not taken action, we find that there are remedies available to the petitioner under the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, which the petitioner can always avail of in case the Panchayat does not take

¶15

¶16

any action as contended. The records also reveal that the petitioner is also putting up a claim to a part of the property wherein the disputed construction is in progress. As such, the petitioner has a remedy if at all advised to avail of, of a civil remedy to stop such alleged encroachment in the property.

¶17

In such circumstances, we find that no case is made out by the petitioner for interference of the Court at this stage in the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Keeping all contentions of the parties on merits open, we reject the above petition.

¶18

Z. A. HAQ, J. F. M. REIS, J.

¶19

ssm.

Smt. Vasanti G. Naroji v. State of Goa through Its Chief Secretary and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vasanti G. Naroji v. State of Goa through Its Chief Secretary and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jsw Steel Ltd. Vs Union of India through the Secretry and 2 Ors.

Smt. Jayashri N. Rajebhosale @ Bimabai Raujirane Thr. Her Attorney Bhupendrasinh N. Rajebhosale Vs State of Goa, Thr. the Chief Secretary and 3 Ors.

M/S Pisces Exim ( India ) Private Limited Vs M/S Sjj Marine Pvt., Ltd., Rep. by Mr. Anil Shamrao Jadhav

Mr. Amit Kumar Ganpat Shirodkar and 4 Ors., Vs State of Goa, through Police Inspector and Anr.

Smt. Vasanti G. Naroji Vs State of Goa through Its Chief Secretary and 7 Ors.

Mr. Anil Shetgaonkar the Deputy Conservator of Forest Vs Shri Yasin Tajdin Mavany