JUDGMENT

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 06.12.2022 passed by Respondent No.1- GCZMA directing the appellant to demolish the structure having an area of 240 square meters. standing in the property bearing Survey No.71/0 of Arambol Village; and the land be restored to its original condition within 30 days from the receipt of this order, on the grounds that the impugned order has been passed by Respondent No.1 in violation of the Principles of Natural Justice, as no opportunity of hearing was given to the appellant to make his submission against the documents extended by the Intervener/ Respondent No.2- Dhirubai J. Tandel before them. The information, which was obtained by him under RTI, based on which Respondent No.1 negated all the documentary evidences extended by the appellant, are annexed by him from page nos. 61 to 66 of the paper book, in order to prove that no opportunity of hearing was given.

2. The next ground set up by the appellant is that Respondent No.2 had moved an intervention application in the 324^th meeting of the Authority and the same was fixed for arguments. Considering the same, Respondent No.1- GCZMA has grossly erred in taking up the matter on its merits, immediately after allowing the said intervention application during 326^th meeting, rather it would have been expedient that an opportunity of hearing was granted to the appellant to advert to the contentions made by the newly impleaded Respondent No.2. After considering the same, the impugned order has been passed by Respondent No.1merely on the basis of reply filed by the appellant and also without hearing oral arguments of the appellant.

3. The next ground set up by the appellant is that Respondent No.1 has failed to consider the fact that Appellant has been regularly attending the hearings in respect of the show cause notice and yet Respondent No. 1 decided the matter in his absence during the 326th meeting of Respondent No.1 held on 27/10/2022.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has also relied on the Judgment dated 19.02.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.9328 of 2022 (Zon Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority & Ors.), wherein following was observed:-

“11. On the basis of the aforesaid order, the impugned order dated 09.05.2022 was passed by the first respondent-Authority. The Authority while determining the compensation has neither issued any Show Cause Notice to the appellant herein nor has it given an opportunity of being heard. Therefore, the said determination made by the first respondent-authority is unilateral and in the absence of hearing the appellant herein, we find that the procedure adopted by the first respondent herein was contrary to the settled principles of natural justice. Further, when the said order dated 09.05.2022 was assailed by the appellant before the NGT, the NGT, having found violation of the principles of natural justice, ought to have remanded the matter to the first respondent-authority for re- determination of environmental compensation after giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellant herein. Instead, the NGT took upon itself to determine the correctness or otherwise of the calculation of environmental compensation arrived at by the first respondent- authority on the premise that it was giving an opportunity to the appellant herein.”

5. Based on the above ruling, it is urged by learned counsel for the appellant that it is proved that an opportunity of hearing was not given to the appellant by the GCZMA, and that error cannot be rectified by this Tribunal treating the present appeal to be a continuation of the matter, which was considered by the GCZMA. But we are of the view that we have no quarrel with the above position of law, but for complying with the said law, we have to give our finding as to whether an opportunity of hearing was given to the appellant or not? If the same was given, but the appellant did not avail of it, t