The Goa Foundation, Thr. Its Secretary, Dr. Claude Alvares., v. State Of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary And 7 ORS.,
1 PILWp26-16 dt 05-3-17 mukund IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA PIL WRIT PETITION NO.26 OF 2016 The Goa Foundation, a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960, through its Secretary, Dr. Claude Alvares, Address : Room 7, Above Mapusa Clinic, Mapusa 403507, Goa.
Email id: goafoundation@gmail.com Tel: 2256479 PAN No.:AAAAG0249C.
...
Petitioner.
Versus
1. State of Goa.
Through its Chief Secretary, Having office at Secretariat, Porvorim, Goa.
2.
The Goa Investment Promotions and Facilitation Board, Through its CEO, Having Office at Secretariat, Porvorim, Goa.
3.
The Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority, Through its Member Secretary, Having office at 3 rd Floor, Dempo Towers, Panaji, Goa.
4.
The Collector (South) Collectorate (South Goa) Margao, Goa.
5.
The Chief Town Planner, Town and Country Planning Department, Dempo Towers, Patto, Panaji, Goa.
2 PILWp26-16 dt 05-3-17 6.
The State Pollution Control Board, through its Member Secretary, Dempo Towers, 1 st Flr, Patto, Panaji, Goa.
7.
The Village Panchayat of Cortalim-Quelossim through its Secretary, Cortalim, Mormogoa, Goa.
8. M/s Movaj Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
Having its office at Missel, Near Old Goa Police Out post, Ribander, Goa.
.... Respondents Ms. Norma Alvares with Ms.Anamika Gode, Advocates for the Petitioner.
Mr. Deep Shirodkar, AGA for Respondent No.1, 3, 4 and 5. Ms. Susan Linhares, Advocate for Respondent no.7. Mr. Ajit R.Kantak with Ms. R.Kantak, Advocates for Respondent no.8.
Coram : N.M. Jamdar & Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ.
Date : 5 March 2018.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per N.M.Jamdar, J.) By this Writ Petition in Public Interest, the following prayers are made:
"(a) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that the "in-principle" approval granted by the Board to the project of Respondent No.8 dated 18 July 2017, and any orders communicating these decisions to Respondent no.8, are illegal, null and void and thereby quashed and set aside.
3 PILWp26-16 dt 05-3-17 b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that the Provisional NOC dated 27 September 2016 granted by the Village Panchayat is illegal, null and void and thereby quashed and set aside.
2. Notice was issued in the petition on 13 December 2016. Rule was issued in the petition on 27 September 2017. Perusal of the farad-sheet shows that the petition was heard from time to time and the submissions of the learned counsel were recorded. 3.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 4.
The learned counsel for Respondent no.7 - Village Panchayat has tendered an affidavit sworn on 3 March 2018, which is taken on record. This affidavit annexes a copy of the Resolution passed by the Village Panchayat on 30 January 2018. The Resolution reads thus:
"True Copy of Resolution Passed in the Fortnightly meeting held on 30.01.2018...
1.
No.17/2016/Go-IPB-102/269 dated 12.01.2018 from Goa Investment Promotion and Facilitation Board, Panaji-Goa on revocation of in-principle approval granted for setting up of Eco Recreational Floating Platform for Park/Mini India Park, with 5 star Category Resort, House Boats, Floating Cottages and Water Sports at Sy.No.170/0 and 171/0, Village Quelossim.
4 PILWp26-16 dt 05-3-17 The meeting widely discussed on the above and the members present unanimously resolved to revoke the provisional NOC granted by the Village Panchayat for the above Eco Recreational Floating Platform for Mini India Park. It is also resolved to intimate the High Court on revocation of provisional NOC for filing reply by Panchayat".
5.
The learned counsel for the Petitioner has also brought to our notice the affidavit filed by Respondent no.2 - Chief Executive Officer - The Goa Investment Promotion & Facilitation Board sworn on 26 February 2018 annexing an order dated 9-12 January 2018. This order indicates that approval granted on 18 July 2016 communicated to Respondent no.8 by letter dated 2 August 2016, is withdrawn. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has also drawn our attention to paragraph 3 of the affidavit in which Respondent no.2 has stated that any permission, which is granted by any other authority based on In-principle approval granted by Respondent no.2 Board, shall have no effect. The learned counsel for Respondent no.8 submitted that the other Authorities, who have granted permissions are not parties to the petition. Be that as it may, if the In-Principle approval has been withdrawn, any action taken by any other Authority based solely on the approval obviously would not survive.
5 PILWp26-16 dt 05-3-17 6.
The learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that, as far as the cause raised in this petition is concerned, in view of subsequent events, does not survive. We also do not find that it is necessary to keep the Public Interest Litigation pending as, both the Board as well as Panchayats have withdrawn their approvals granted, which was the cause raised in the the Petition. 7.
We make it clear that we are disposing of the Public Interest Litigation in view of the orders passed by the Authorities, and we have not gone into merits of the inter se disputes.
8. The Public Interest Litigation Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
Prithviraj K. Chavan, J N.M. Jamdar, J.