MUKUND RAMA NAIK KARMALI Vs. PEDRO MASCARENHAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent.

(2.) This writ petition challenges the order dated 23/9/2015 passed in R.C.A. No.43/2015 by the Court of Adhoc District Judge-I, South Goa, 2 WP 1011 2015 Margao, thereby confirming the order passed by the Dy. Collector on 25/5/2015. By this order, the Dy. Collector had directed that the tree in question which is a cotton tree (savori) be cut by the petitioner within ten days from the date of the order.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent fairly submits, on instructions, that Section 12A mandates that the order of cutting of the tree must be passed by the Dy. Collector on the basis of the report/ order made by him in consultation with the tree officer. A bare perusal of the order of the Dy. Collector as well as the impugned order is enough to reach a conclusion that the mandate of Section 12 A has not been followed in the instant case.