EDWIN MASCARENHAS Vs. THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel appearing for the parties. Our attention is invited by learned Counsel Mr. Menezes to two objections that the Petitioner has raised to the construction at site. First, it is submitted that there is no 10 metres wide road existing at site whereas in para 7 of the affidavit of the Planning Authority, the Authority has proposed a 10 metres wide road and that does not answer the requirements of the Planning and Development Authority Regulations, 2000 and particularly part 4 thereof.

(2.) FURTHER , on instructions it is stated that front set -back would be maintained to the extent of 3.5 metres and it will be maintained without putting up any constructions or any other obstacle, so as to enable persons to alight from vehicles and that portion will be maintained as open to sky.

(3.) IN the light of the above undertakings given by the Planning Authority and Developers to this Court and since there is no other objection at site, the petition is disposed of. However, it is directed that the completion certification will be issued by the Planning Authority only if the Builder and Developers hands over 1.5 metres of land free of costs to the Planning Authority. Moreover, the set -back area should be maintained and the Planning Authority will ensure that the same remains un -constructed and open to sky. Writ Petition stands disposed of.