Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Nandlal Khemka, filed multiple writ petitions challenging the demolition of structures on survey no. 46/1 at Candolim, Bardez, Goa. The petitioner claimed to be a social worker and environmental activist, alleging that the demolition was illegal and in violation of CRZ norms. However, the court noted that the petitioner had suppressed material facts, including the pendency of earlier writ petitions (WP No. 293/2019, 308/2019, 294/2019) and orders passed therein. The court found that the petitioner was not the owner of the land, which belonged to the respondents Hanumant G. Kandolkar and Deepak Ramesh Kandolkar. The demolition was carried out by the authorities pursuant to orders of the competent authority. The court held that the writ petitions were not maintainable due to suppression of facts and lack of locus standi. The petitions were dismissed with costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Suppression of Material Facts - Petitioner failed to disclose pendency of earlier writ petitions and orders passed therein - Held that suppression of material facts disentitles the petitioner to any relief and the petitions are liable to be dismissed on this ground alone (Paras 10-15). B) Environmental Law - Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) - Illegal Construction - Demolition - The petitioner challenged demolition of structures on land owned by respondents, claiming violation of CRZ norms - Held that the petitioner has no locus standi as he is not the owner of the land and the demolition was carried out pursuant to valid orders (Paras 16-20). C) Property Law - Locus Standi - Ownership - The petitioner, not being the owner of the property, cannot maintain a writ petition challenging demolition of structures on the said property - Held that only the owner or person with legal right can challenge such action (Paras 21-25).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petitions are maintainable in light of suppression of material facts and whether the petitioner has locus standi to challenge the demolition of construction on land not owned by him.
Final Decision
Writ petitions dismissed with costs.
Law Points
- Suppression of material facts
- Maintainability of writ petition
- CRZ violations
- Demolition of illegal construction
- Locus standi
- Alternative remedy
