Rivo Event Management Group And ANR., v. The State Of Goa, Through Its Chief Secretary And 2 ORS.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 531 OF 2015 RIVO EVENT MANAGEMENT GROUP AND ANR., ... Petitioners

Versus

THE STATE OF GOA, THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY AND 2 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Zeller De Sozua, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. M. Salkar, Government Advocate for the respondents No.1 and 2.

Mr. S. D. Padiyar, Advocate for the respondent No.3. Coram:- F. M. REIS & K. L. WADANE, JJ.

Date:- 15th July, 2015 P.C.:

We have extensively heard Mr. Zeller De Souza, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. M. D. Salkar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents No.1 and 2 and Mr. S. D. Padiyar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No.3.

2. Mr. Zeller De Souza, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners has taken us through the records to point out that despite of seeking permissions from the Statutory Authorities well in advance to have a shopping event in the City of Margao, such permissions were not expeditiously examined by such Authorities. The learned Counsel has also brought to our notice that such an event

WP/531/2015 was, in fact, fixed in the first fortnight of July, 2015, but, however, despite of the fact that the permissions were applied in the month of May/June, 2015, as the requisite permissions were not forthcoming from the Authorities, the event had to be cancelled. The learned Counsel has, thereafter, taken us through the records to point out that the said event is now scheduled from 23rd July, 2015 to 2nd August, 2015 and that though the applications for the permissions have been filed before the concerned authorities with all requisite documents, a decision on such applications has not been taken by the respondent No.2.

3. Mr. S.D. Padiyar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 states that though an application filed by the petitioners is pending before the Municipal Council, no decision can be taken unless the requisite permissions from the District Magistrate are obtained by the petitioners.

4. In such circumstances, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the contentions of Mr. Zeller de Souza, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and by consent, we find it appropriate to dispose of the above writ petition by directing the respondent No.2 to take a decision on the application filed by the petitioners on 27th May, 2015, as expeditiously as possible and, in any event, on or before 18th July, 2015, in accordance with law. The respondent No.3 shall, thereafter, proceed

WP/531/2015 to examine the permissions sought by the petitioners vide their application dated 24th June, 2015, on or before 21 July 2015, in accordance with law.

5. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of. Parties to act on duly authenticated copy of this order. K. L. WADANE, J.

F. M. REIS, J.

ssm.