PIEDADE FILOMENA GONSLVES Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is in possession of a piece of property included in survey No. 54/4 located within the jurisdiction of village panchayat of Colva, Salcete, Goa. It is the appellant's own case, vide para 4 of the writ petition, that earlier there existed a structure of thatched roof supported by laterite stone pillars, which structure was used by sun bathers and visitors. However, in place of old construction, appellant commenced putting up fresh construction which resulted into a pucca building coming up in existence in place of the old structure.

(2.) The new building is now a structure of laterite stones and cement with a concrete roof. This construction was commenced on 13-7-1994 and completed on 17-8-1994. Two writ petitions came to be filed in the High Court of Bombay at Goa. CWP No. 76 of 1995 was filed by the appellant's neighbour seeking demolition of the construction put up by the appellant. CWP No. 237 of 1999 was filed by the appellant seeking protection of the construction raised by her. The petitioner in CWP No. 76 of 1995 alleged the appellant's construction to be unauthorised and also violative of High Tide Line in Coastal Region Zone within which no construction is permissible. The case of the appellant in writ petition No. 237 of 1999 was that the construction put up by her was beyond 200 metres from High Tide Line, and therefore, permissible and that although the appellant's construction was not supported by permissible and that although the appellant's construction was not supported by previous permissible by the authorities, the same could be regularised. The High Court allowed the writ petition No. 76 of 1995 while dismissing the appellants writ petition No. 237 of 1999. The High Court directed the construction put up by the appellant to be demolished.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved by the common judgment disposing of the two writ petitions, the appellant has filed these appeals by special leave. The learned senior counsel for the appellant has reiterated the same two contentions which were advanced before the High Court. Forceful reliance has been placed on the judgment of the High Court of Bombay delivered by a Division Bench on 25-9-1996 in Writ Petition No. 102 of 1996 titled The Goa Foundation and another v. State of Goa and others, wherein the High Court has issued directions in the matter of determining the High Tide Line on the basis of Hydrographic charts prepared by the Naval Hydrographic Office. The learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that such a direction issued by the Division Bench of the High Court in another writ petition has been accepted by the respondents and therefore, unless and until the High Tide Line has been determined in compliance with the direction issued by the High Court on 25-9-1996, the construction raised by the appellant should not be demolished.