← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/419/2018disposed of

Francisco Rodrigues., v. State Of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary And 3 ORS.,

2018-09-03Hon'Ble Shri Justice N. M. Jamdar,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prithviraj K. Chavan2 pages

Amrut 1 WP419-18dt 03-09-2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 419 OF 2018 Francisco Rodrigues ...

Petitioner

Versus

State of Goa & Ors.

.... Respondents Ms. Neha Shirodkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. D. Lawande, Advocate General with Mr. Rajesh Shivolkar, Additional Government Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr. J. Godinho, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mr. Z. D'Souza, Advocate for Respondent No.3. Mr. V. Amonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.4. Coram : N.M. Jamdar & Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ.

Date : 3 September 2018.

P.C.:

On 21 August 2018, we had passed the following order. "An affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of the Respondent no.3 stating that the workshop in question has been closed under the directions of the Respondent no.2 i.e. Pollution Control Board. The learned Counsel

Amrut 2 WP419-18dt 03-09-2018 appearing for the Respondent no.2-Pollution Control Board reiterated the position and states that directions have been issued by the Pollution Control Board to close the operations and seal the same. He places the report along with the letter on record. The learned Counsel for the Respondent no.4 seeks time and states that he has just been instructed to appear in the matter.

2.

Stand over to 3 September 2018 under the caption "For Directions".

3. On the next date, the Respondent no.4 will file an affidavit informing the Court as to whether the unit has been closed and sealed pursuant to the directions issued by the Pollution Control Board.

"

2.

The learned counsel for Respondent No.4 tenders an affidavit filed by the partner of the Respondent No.4. It is stated in the affidavit that the premises have been sealed. The learned counsel for the Petitioner also states that, that is the position as on date. 3.

In view of this position which is existing as on date, it is not necessary to proceed in this petition any further. Without going into any other aspect, the writ petition is disposed of. Prithviraj K. Chavan, J. N.M. Jamdar, J.