Corporation Of City Of Panaji, Thr. Its Commissioner., v. State Of Goa, Thr. Chief Secretary And 3 ORS.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 971 OF 2016 CORPORATION OF CITY OF PANAJI, THR. ITS COMMISSIONER., ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF GOA, THR. CHIEF SECRETARY AND 3 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Pranay A. Kamat, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S. D. Lotlikar, Advocate General with Mr. A. Prabhu Dessai, Additional Government Advocate for the respondents No.1 and 2. Coram:- F. M. REIS & NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ.

Date:- 10th October, 2016 P.C.:

Heard Mr. Pranay A. Kamat, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. S. D. Lotlikar, learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents No.1 and 2.

2. During the course of hearing of the above petition, Mr. P. Kamat, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has pointed out that the relief sought by the petitioner, at this stage, is only to direct the respondent No.2 to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner dated 15/07/2016 pending before the respondent No.2. Mr. Kamat further points out that he wishes to supplement the representation by filing some additional documents within two weeks from today.

WP/971/2016

3. Mr. S.D. Lotlikar, learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents No.1 and 2 states that such a representation would be decided by the respondent No.2, on its own merits, in accordance with law, within two months from today.

4. In such circumstances, we dispose of the above petition by accepting the statement of the learned Advocate General. The respondent No.2 shall take decision on the said representation after receiving additional documents filed by the petitioner, within two months from the date of receipt of such documents. Needless to say, all contentions of the parties on merits are left open as we have not examined the rival contentions in the above petition. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J.

F. M. REIS, J.

ssm.