Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Goa University's Challenge to Town Planning Board Directions and Allows Dr. Shetye's Complaint Regarding Illegal Compound Wall. The Court held that the University's construction of a compound wall without leaving access to neighboring properties was unauthorized and that the regularization order did not legalize the wall without proper plans.

High Court: Bombay High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 380
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The judgment concerns two writ petitions: WP No.414/2023 filed by Goa University challenging an order of the Town and Country Planning Board dated 20.12.2021 directing compliance with earlier directions, and WP No.54/2023 filed by Dr. Suresh B. Shetye seeking action against the University for constructing a compound wall without leaving access to his properties. The University was established in 1985 under the Goa University Act, 1984, and the Government of Goa acquired lands for its campus. In 2009/2010, the University constructed a compound wall along its periphery. In 2013, the NGPDA informed the University that a 30-metre wide ODP road was planned along the Northern boundary and that the University's barbed wire fencing had blocked the road. A show cause notice was issued in 2014 alleging unauthorized construction and encroachment. The University challenged a stop work order before the Board, which constituted a Sub-Committee to inspect the site. The Board passed an order on 27.10.2015 directing the University to remove the compound wall where it blocked the ODP road and to provide access to neighboring properties. The University sought regularization of the wall, and the GPPDA granted regularization on 24.07.2018, but without specifying plans. Dr. Shetye complained that the wall blocked access to his properties. The court held that the regularization order was vague and did not legalize the wall without leaving access. The court dismissed the University's petition and allowed Dr. Shetye's petition, directing the University to comply with the Board's directions and provide access to neighboring properties.

Headnote

A) Town and Country Planning - Regularization of Unauthorized Construction - Section 52, Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 - The Board's order dated 27.10.2015 required the University to remove the compound wall where it blocked the ODP road and to provide access to neighboring properties. The regularization order dated 24.07.2018 did not specify the plans or dimensions of the wall, and thus could not be deemed to have legalized the wall without leaving access. Held that the regularization order was vague and did not cure the illegality of the wall blocking access. (Paras 10-15)

B) Town and Country Planning - Access to Neighboring Properties - Section 52, Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 - The University's compound wall constructed along its periphery without leaving any openings for access to neighboring properties, including Dr. Shetye's land, was held to be illegal. The Board's direction to provide access was valid and the University was required to comply. Held that the wall must be modified to provide reasonable access to the neighboring properties. (Paras 16-20)

C) Town and Country Planning - Statutory Authority Exemption - Section 66, Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 - The University's claim of exemption from seeking construction licenses under the Panchayat Raj Act was not accepted as a blanket exemption from town planning regulations. The University was required to comply with the TCP Act and the Board's directions. Held that the University cannot claim exemption from the requirement to leave access to neighboring properties. (Paras 21-25)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Goa University's construction of a compound wall without leaving access to neighboring properties was unauthorized and whether the regularization order dated 24.07.2018 legalized the wall without proper plans.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court dismissed Writ Petition No.414/2023 filed by Goa University and allowed Writ Petition No.54/2023 filed by Dr. Suresh B. Shetye. The court directed the University to comply with the Board's directions and provide access to neighboring properties, and directed the NGPDA to take action on Dr. Shetye's complaint.

Law Points

  • Town and Country Planning Act
  • 1974
  • Section 52
  • Section 66
  • Panchayat Raj Act
  • 1994
  • Regularization of unauthorized construction
  • Access to neighboring properties
  • Compound wall
  • Statutory authority exemption
  • Sub-Committee inspection
  • ODP road
  • Right of way
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (BOM) (11) 251

Writ Petition No.414 of 2023 with Writ Petition No.54 of 2023

2024-11-25

M. S. Sonak, Valmiki Menezes

2024:BHC-GOA:1998-DB

Ms A.A. Agni, Senior Advocate with Ms Afrin Khanm Harihar and Mr Junaid Shaikh for Petitioner in WP No.414/2023; Mr Shivan Desai with Mr A. Sardessai, Ms M. Viegas and Ms T. Menezes for Petitioner in WP No.54/2023; Mr Neehal Vernekar, Additional Government Advocate for Respondent-State in WP No.54/2023; Mr Prashil Arolkar, Additional Government Advocate for Respondent-State in WP No.414/2023; Mr Sahish Mahambrey for Respondent No.3 in WP No.54/2023 and Respondent No.2 in WP No.414/2023

Goa University (in WP No.414/2023); Dr. Suresh B. Shetye (in WP No.54/2023)

Town and Country Planning Board, North Goa Planning and Development Authority, State of Goa, and others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions challenging orders of the Town and Country Planning Board regarding unauthorized construction of a compound wall by Goa University and seeking action for blocking access to neighboring properties.

Remedy Sought

Goa University sought quashing of Board's order dated 20.12.2021 and clarification of earlier directions; Dr. Shetye sought direction to demolish the compound wall and take action on his complaint.

Filing Reason

The University constructed a compound wall without leaving access to neighboring properties, and the Board directed compliance with earlier orders to remove the wall where it blocked the ODP road and provide access.

Previous Decisions

The Board passed an order on 27.10.2015 directing the University to remove the compound wall where it blocked the ODP road and to provide access to neighboring properties. The GPPDA granted regularization on 24.07.2018 without specifying plans.

Issues

Whether the regularization order dated 24.07.2018 legalized the compound wall without leaving access to neighboring properties. Whether the University was required to comply with the Board's directions to provide access to neighboring properties. Whether the University could claim exemption from town planning regulations as a statutory authority.

Submissions/Arguments

Goa University argued that the regularization order legalized the wall and that the Board's directions were beyond its jurisdiction. Dr. Shetye argued that the wall was constructed without permission and blocked access to his properties, and the regularization order was vague and did not legalize the wall without leaving access.

Ratio Decidendi

The regularization order dated 24.07.2018 was vague and did not specify the plans or dimensions of the compound wall, and thus could not be deemed to have legalized the wall without leaving access to neighboring properties. The University was required to comply with the Board's directions to provide access.

Judgment Excerpts

The Board passed the following order: ... The regularization order dated 24.07.2018 did not specify the plans or dimensions of the wall, and thus could not be deemed to have legalized the wall without leaving access.

Procedural History

The University filed an appeal under Section 52 of the TCP Act against a stop work order. The Board constituted a Sub-Committee and passed an order on 27.10.2015. The University sought regularization, which was granted on 24.07.2018. Dr. Shetye filed a complaint on 08.09.2022. The Board passed an order on 20.12.2021 directing compliance. The University filed WP No.414/2023 challenging the order, and Dr. Shetye filed WP No.54/2023 seeking action.

Acts & Sections

  • Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974: Section 52
  • Panchayat Raj Act, 1994: Section 66
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Tenancy and Partnership Dispute Under U.P. Urban Buildings Act and Partnership Act. The Court upheld the High Court's dismissal of a review application, noting partnership dissolution upon partners' deaths but not al...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal by Parents-in-Law Convicted for Dowry Death and Cruelty - Presumption Under Section 113B Evidence Act Applied. Death within seven years of marriage, dowry demands, and cruelty proved; no rebuttal evidence led by accused...