Disposed

Rithika Gadekar v. High Court on Its Own Motion (in the Matter of Illegal Construction)

Bombay HC6 May 2024MCA/168/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applications by beach shack allottees seeking de-sealing of their structures. The Court directed the GCZMA to inspect the shacks within a week. If compliant, GCZMA may authorize the Panchayat to de-seal, subject to closure by May 31, 2024, and dismantling by June 10, 2024.

What did the court decide?

Direction for GCZMA inspection and conditional de-sealing of beach shacks by Panchayat until June 10, 2024.

Rithika Gadekar Vs High Court on Its Own Motion (in… — Environment and Pollution | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

931-MCA-843-24 (F),170,200,169,168-24.DOC

¶2

Suchitra

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶4

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.843/2024 (F) With MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.170, 200, 169 and 168/2024 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (SUO MOTO) NO.2/2022

¶5

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.843/2024 (F)

LUIS COUTINHO

… APPLICANT

Versus

HIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION (IN THE MATTER OF ILLEGAL … RESPONDENT CONSTRUCTION)

¶10

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.170/2024

¶11

JANARDHAN SHIRODKAR … APPLICANT Versus HIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION (IN THE MATTER OF ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION) … RESPONDENT

¶12

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.200/2024

¶13

ANTONIO SALVADOR CUSTODIO DE BRITTO … APPLICANT Versus HIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION (IN THE MATTER OF ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION) … RESPONDENT

¶14

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.169/2024

¶15

CHANDRAKANT MANDREKAR … APPLICANT Versus

¶16

HIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION (IN THE MATTER OF ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION) … RESPONDENT

¶17

Page 1 of 4 6^th May, 2024

¶18

931-MCA-843-24 (F),170,200,169,168-24.DOC

¶19

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.168/2024

¶20

RITHIKA GADEKAR … APPLICANT Versus HIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION (IN THE MATTER OF ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION) … RESPONDENT

¶21

Mr Shivan Desai with Mr A. Sardessai, Advocates for the Applicants. Mr Abhijit Gosavi, Amicus Curiae with Mr G. Naik, Advocate. Mr D. Pangam, AG with Mr Deep Shirodkar, AGA for the State. Mr P. Kamat, Advocate for the Panchayat.

¶22

CORAM: M. S. SONAK & VALMIKI MENEZES, JJ.

¶23

DATE: 6^th MAY 2024

¶24

P.C.:

¶25

1. Heard Mr Shivan Desai with Mr A. Sardessai for the applicants, Mr D. Pangam, learned AG appears along with Mr Deep Shirodkar, learned AGA for the State and Mr P. Kamat for the Panchayat. We have also heard Mr Abhijit Gosavi, the learned Amicus Curiae in the matter.

¶26

2. Tese are applications by the allottees of beach shacks under the Government Shack Policy for 2023-26 for de-sealing the beach shacks.

¶27

3. Te applicants have pleaded that they have all the necessary permissions, such as the Director of Tourism’s Provisional License, Village Panchayat permission, NOC from DHS, Fire NOC, Excise License, FSSAI Registration Certificate, consent to operate from GSPCB, Director of Tourism’s license for erection of temporary shack, and a trade license from the Panchayat.

¶28

Page 2 of 4 6^th May, 2024

¶29

931-MCA-843-24 (F),170,200,169,168-24.DOC

¶30

4. Te applicants do not have any permission from the TCP Dept. However, they rely on Section 3 r/w. Section 12 of Ordinance No.3/2024 notified in the Official Gazette on 15.03.2024.

¶31

5. Without going into the issue of the validity of the Ordinance or the interpretation of its provisions, we direct the GCZMA to inspect the five beach shacks and examine whether the shacks put up at the site are in accordance with the permissions granted by the GCZMA to the Directorate of Tourism for putting up such shacks. Tis exercise must be completed within a week from today. If the GCZMA finds this so, the GCZMA is authorised to write to the Panchayat to de-seal these five shacks.

¶32

6. Te above authority is granted to the GCZMA in these five cases only because of the ensuing Court vacations, so these applicants need not once again come to the Court to seek orders for de-sealing.

¶33

7. Mr Shivan Desai, learned counsel for the applicants, admits that even if the shacks are de-sealed and commercial operations are allowed through them, these operations will have to be closed by 31.05.2024, and the shacks will have to be dismantled by 10.06.2024. On instructions, he states that this condition will be scrupulously complied with.

¶34

8. Terefore, even if the Panchayat orders the de-sealing of these five shacks, the Panchayat must also ensure that the operations come to a halt on 31.05.2024 and the shacks are dismantled by 10.06.2024. Te Panchayat must file compliance report with photographs in the main petition.

¶35

9. All the above Misc. Civil Applications are disposed of in the above terms without any order for costs.

¶36

Page 3 of 4 6^th May, 2024

¶37

931-MCA-843-24 (F),170,200,169,168-24.DOC

¶38

10. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this Order.

¶39

VALMIKI MENEZES, J.

¶40

M. S. SONAK, J.

¶41

SUCHITRA Digitally signed by SUCHITRA NANDAN NANDAN SINGBAL SINGBAL Date: 2024.05.08 16:48:45 +05'30'

¶42

Page 4 of 4 6^th May, 2024

Rithika Gadekar v. High Court on Its Own Motion (in the Matter of Illegal Construction)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rithika Gadekar v. High Court on Its Own Motion (in the Matter of Illegal Construction)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Goa Foundation Thr. Its Secretary Dr. Claude Alvares and Anr. Vs Town and Country Planning Department Thr. the Chief Town Planner and 6 Ors.

Maria Amabel Mascarenhas Lobo Clemente and Anr. Vs Shaikh Ali Ahmed, Member Secretary of South Goa Planning and Development Authority

Goa Trade and Commercial Workers Union, Rep. by Its General Secretary Rajendra Datta Mangueshkar Vs State of Goa Thr. the Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Ian Savio Rock Fernandes Vs Union of India, Thr. the Ministry of External Affairs and 2 Ors.

Eunice Braganza Vs State of Goa Thr the Chief Secretary and 3 Ors.

Vedanta Limited Rep. by Auth. Signatory Dhirajkumar Namdeo Jagdish Vs State of Goa Thr. the Chief Secretary and Anr.