SHANTADURGA KUMBHARJUVENKARIM Vs. DEVKI KRISHNA RAVALNATH SAUNSTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri J.E.Coelho Pereira, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Shri V.R. Tamba, learned Counsel for the respondent no.1, Shri Deep Shirodkar, learned AGA for the respondent no.2 and Shri Devidas Pangam, learned Counsel for the respondent no.3.

(2.) Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel. The learned counsel appearing for the respective parties waive notice.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties who have vehemently argued their respective stands disputing the correctness or otherwise of the technical approval granted to the respondent no.1 by order dated 5.2.2013. Shri Coelho Pereira, learned Senior Counsel has also disputed the correctness of the revocation of the technical approval granted to the petitioner dated 13.8.2014, but however, upon instructions Shri Coelho Pereira, learned Senior Counsel does not press such challenge at this stage. In such circumstances, the only aspect required for consideration is whether the petitioner is justified to raise a challenge to the technical approval granted to the respondent no.1 by the said order dated 13.8.2014. Shri Coelho Pereira, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has also pointed out that the subject property whether the structure in question has been permitted, is surveyed under No. 57/10 of Orgao village which according to the petitioner, belongs to the petitioner. It is further submitted that there was an NOC which was granted to the respondent no.1 way back in the year 1987 to carry out development in the said property. It is further pointed out that based on such NOC, the subject technical approval was granted by the respondent no.2. The learned Senior Counsel has also pointed out that thereafter the NOC was revoked by the petitioner. It is further pointed out that the petitioner raised objections to the technical approval granted by the respondent no.2 on 8.8.2012, which were thereafter examined by the respondent no.2 and vide letter dated 16th of June, 2014, the Village Panchayat-respondent no.4 were called upon to examine the objections raised by the petitioner. The learned Senior Counsel further submits that no decision has been taken with that regard but however, as there was apprehension that the respondent no.1 may proceed to put up a construction in the subject property, the petitioner filed the above petition inter alia seeking to quash and set aside the technical approval granted by the respondent no.2. The learned Senior Counsel, further points out that as the NOC has been revoked, the subject technical approval would not survive and consequently deserves to be quashed and set aside.