Mario Dickson. v. The State Of Goa Thr. The Chief Secretary And 2 ORS.,

903-WP-356-2016.DOC Niti

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO.356 OF 2016 MARIO DICKSON ... PETITIONER

Versus

THE STATE OF GOA THR.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY AND 2 ORS.

... RESPONDENTS Mr T. Vaz, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr Vishwadh Sardessai, Additional Government Advocate for the Respondents - State.

CORAM:

M.S. SONAK & VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.

DATE :

2nd MAY 2023 P.C. :

1.

Heard Mr T. Vaz for the petitioner and Mr Vishwadh Sardessai, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. 2.

By an interim order dated 28.03.2016, status quo was ordered with regard to the subject property of the petitioner. 3.

Mr Vishwadh Sardessai, on instructions, states that the construction of the road is already complete without touching the petitioner's property. He, therefore, submits that the reliefs in this 2nd May 2023

903-WP-356-2016.DOC petition are rendered infructuous and, in any case, the apprehensions expressed by the petitioner in this petition were not correct. 4.

A status quo order has been operating since 2016. In terms of Mr Sardessai's statement the road in question is already constructed without touching petitioner's property. In such circumstances, this petition need not be kept pending any longer. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of since the cause of action, if any, no longer survives. In case of any fresh cause of action the petitioner is always at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum to protect his alleged right in the subject property. 5.

The petition is disposed of.

VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.

M.S. SONAK, J.

NITI K HALDANKAR Date: 2023.05.02 16:44:54 +05'30'

NITI K HALDANKAR 2nd May 2023