Bombay High Court at Goa Allows Writ Petition Challenging Illegal Construction in Residential Zone. Construction of Commercial Building in Residential Zone Violates Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations, 2010 and Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: GOA In Favour of Prosecution
  • 21
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Sudesh Kurade, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Goa challenging the construction of a commercial building by respondent No.6, Anand Prabhakar Sawant, in a residential zone in Queola, Ponda, Goa. The petitioner alleged that the construction was illegal as it violated the Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations, 2010 and the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The respondent No.6 had obtained approval from the Village Panchayat of Queola for construction of a residential building but was constructing a commercial building without any change of zone or valid approval. The court examined the facts and found that the construction was indeed in a residential zone and the Panchayat's approval was invalid. The court also noted that the construction was in an eco-sensitive zone and required environmental clearance under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, which was not obtained. The court held that the construction was illegal and liable to be demolished. The court ordered the demolition of the illegal construction and directed the authorities to take appropriate action against the respondent No.6 and the Panchayat officials for granting illegal approval. The court also imposed costs on the respondent No.6.

Headnote

A) Panchayat Law - Illegal Construction - Residential Zone - Construction of commercial building in residential zone without valid Panchayat approval violates the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations, 2010 - The court held that the Panchayat's approval was invalid as the construction was in a residential zone and no change of zone was obtained. (Paras 1-26)

B) Environmental Law - Environmental Clearance - Construction in Eco-Sensitive Zone - The court noted that the construction was in an eco-sensitive zone and required environmental clearance under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, which was not obtained. (Paras 10-15)

C) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Public Interest - The court exercised its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to order demolition of illegal construction in public interest. (Paras 20-26)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the construction of a commercial building in a residential zone without valid Panchayat approval and in violation of the Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations, 2010 is illegal and liable to be demolished.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition and ordered the demolition of the illegal construction. The court directed the authorities to take appropriate action against the respondent No.6 and the Panchayat officials for granting illegal approval. Costs were imposed on respondent No.6.

Law Points

  • Illegal construction
  • residential zone
  • commercial use
  • Panchayat approval
  • building regulations
  • demolition order
  • environmental clearance
  • public interest
  • writ jurisdiction
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (BOM) (09) 132

WP-254-2022

2023-09-27

2023:BHC-GOA:1694-DB

Mr Jagannath J. Mulgaonkar with Ms Deeksha Sharma for petitioner; Mr D.J. Pangam, Advocate General with Mr Neehal S. Vernekar for respondents 1,3,4,5; Mr Akshay Naik for respondent 2; Ms Prema Matkar for respondent 6

Sudesh Kurade

State of Goa, Sarpanch/Secretary of Village Panchayat Queola, Deputy Town Planner, Directorate of Panchayats, Block Development Officer, Anand Prabhakar Sawant

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging illegal construction of a commercial building in a residential zone.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought demolition of the illegal construction and direction to authorities to take action.

Filing Reason

Construction of commercial building in residential zone without valid Panchayat approval and in violation of building regulations.

Issues

Whether the construction of a commercial building in a residential zone without valid Panchayat approval is illegal. Whether the court should order demolition of the illegal construction.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the construction violated the Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations, 2010 and the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Respondent No.6 argued that the construction was approved by the Panchayat and was legal.

Ratio Decidendi

Construction of a commercial building in a residential zone without valid Panchayat approval and in violation of the Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations, 2010 is illegal and liable to be demolished. The court has the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to order demolition in public interest.

Judgment Excerpts

The construction of a commercial building in a residential zone without valid Panchayat approval is illegal. The court ordered the demolition of the illegal construction.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Goa challenging the construction. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 27-09-2023.

Acts & Sections

  • Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994:
  • Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations, 2010:
  • Environment Protection Act, 1986:
  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court at Goa Allows Writ Petition Challenging Illegal Construction in Residential Zone. Construction of Commercial Building in Residential Zone Violates Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulations, 2010 and Panchayat Raj Ac...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Lack of Motive. Conviction under Section 302 IPC Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt.