Mariano B. Coutinho., v. State Of Goa, Thr. Chief Secretary And 3 ORS.,

4-WP816-17.DOC Santosh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO.816 OF 2017 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 809 OF 2017 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.810 OF 2017 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.817 OF 2017 Ramnath Naik

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Goa through the Chief Secretary & Anr

...Respondents

Mr SS Kantak, Senior Advocate, with Kher C John Simoes for the petitioners Mr Dattaprasad Lawande, Advocate General with Kalangutkar, Additional Govt Advocate for respondents No 1, 2 & 3 in WP 816/2017; with A Gomes Pereira, Additional Govt Advocate for respondents No 1, 2 & 3 in WP 809/2017, WP 810/2017 and WP 817/2017

CORAM:

G.S. PATEL, NUTAN SARDESSAI, JJ DATED:

3rd October 2017 PC:- 1.

On instructions, Mr. Lawande, learned Advocate General states that the Petitioner's representation will be considered on merits, but without reference to the Notification dated 4th July 2001. That representation will be considered and decided within a period of four weeks from today. We accept the statement. 3rd October 2017

4-WP816-17.DOC 2.

The reason we have accepted the statement is that it is an admitted position that the scheme of the Notification of 4th July 2001 is not applicable to the Petitioners' case. The Petitioners' construction is after the date of the amnesty notified under that scheme. There is, however, a provision for regularisation that is available in the Code itself, and it is on this basis that the Petitioners' representation will have to be considered. 3.

The petition is disposed of in these terms, with liberty to the Petitioners to apply should the decision be adverse to them. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J G. S. PATEL, J 3rd October 2017