ANTONIO G BRAGANZA Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Made returnable forthwith.

(2.) The petitioner has taken exception to the alleged illegal construction and the alleged industrial use of the property of respondent nos. 8 and 9 who are his neighbours. The construction has been sought to be shown in a certain part of the plot which was revised and which shows three blocks being block nos. A, B and C on survey no.163/4. The plan shows the total built up area 849.84 square metres consuming FSI/FAR 79.05%. Respondent nos. 8 and 9 contend that the 0.8 FAR which is entitled to be used will not be used. The plan shows two portions of the proposed building 'A' as existing structure to be demolished. It is' contended that without demolishing, the FSI/FAR has not been exceeded.

(3.) Respondent nos. 8 and 9 are also the owners of plot on survey nos.164/1 and 164/12. The structure on those survey numbers are stated by the petitioner to be wholly illegal. Respondent nos. 8 and 9 claim those structures to have been constructed since 1982. The petitioner claims that it is not shown in the re-survey plan.