NEETENDRA NARESH GADEKAR Vs. ASDRALENO DE MELLO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. J.P. Mulgaonkar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. Rohit Bras De Sa, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 and Ms. Kholkar, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent no.2.

(2.) At the request of Mr. Mulgaonkar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, leave to amend. Amendment in the prayer clause to be carried out forthwith.

(3.) The above petition takes exception to an order dated 28th April, 2008, whereby the disputed structure was ordered to be demolished by the respondent no.2. Mr. Mulgaonkar, the learned counsel, points out that the challenge to the said order is on two counts, first is that such order came to be passed by misconstruing the documents produced by the petitioners and as such, in breach of the principles of natural justice and secondly on the count that the petitioners have also challenged the constitutional validity of the Goa Land (Prohibition on Construction) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1995"). Mr. Mulgaonkar, the learned counsel, in support of his first contention, has pointed out that the subject property is surveyed in the Record of Rights bearing survey no.19/4 of village Canca wherein the name of the petitioners figures in the said records. The learned counsel further points out that the property belongs to the Communidade which is the respondent no.1 and that the petitioners are tenants of the subject property.