SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 19

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL


WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE


THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION)


APPEAL NO. 20/2023(WZ)


IN THE MATTER OF:


Harishchandra Vitthal Naik


H. No.10, Junas Wada,


Mandrem Pernem,


Goa- 403 527


.....Appellant


Versus


1. The Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority,


4th Floor, Dempo Towers,


Patto, Panaji,


Goa 403001


2. The State of Goa


Secretariat Porvorim,


Goa 403 521


3. The S.D.O./ Deputy Collector,


Pernem, Goa


4. Mr. Jayant G. Naik,


Flat UGF-004, Building C,


Pinto Ville, Socorro Bardez,


Goa- 403 521


.....Respondents


Counsel for the Appellant:


Mr. Balkrishna Sardessai, Advocate for appellant


Counsel for the Respondents:


Ms. Supriya Dangare, Advocate for R-1, 2 & 3


Mr. Abhijit Gosavi, Advocate for R-4


PRESENT:


Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh (Judicial Member)


Hon’ble Dr. Sujit Kumar Bajpayee (Expert Member)


Reserved on : 15.04.2026


Pronounced on : 02.06.2026

Advocates:
For the Petitioner: VAISHALI JADHAV
For the Respondent:

JUDGMENT

1. This appeal has been filed, seeking quashing of direction dated 15.03.2023 passed by Respondent No.1- The Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority and to remand the matter back to the Respondent No.1 to conduct enquiry with reference to the permission and correspondence, in connection with the alleged structures. By the impugned order, the appellant is directed to demolish the offending structures i.e. Shack in Survey No.269/3 and G+1 RCC structure in Survey No.269/4, 5 and 6 of Junaswada, Mandrem, Pernem, Goa within 30 days of the receipt of the order.

2. The facts as gathered from the impugned order itself would reveal that the Respondent No.1 had received the complaint from one Mr. Vishwanath Kamat Desai dated 16.09.2020 alleging that Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mehra (Sunny) and Sudesh Kumar Mehra (Billa) had illegally carried out the construction of beach shack with bar, illegally cut sand dunes and had done illegal construction of retaining wall. They were also discharging the sewage in sea in Survey No.269/3 of Junaswada, Mandrem, Pernem, Goa.

3. On receipt of the said complaint, the site inspection was conducted by the Expert Member of GCZMA on 06.12.2020, wherein serious violation of CRZ Notification, 2011 was noticed and a Show Cause cum Stop Work Order dated 18.11.2021 was issued to the violators.

4. The matter was placed before the GCZMA in its 238th meeting held on 26.11.2020 for consideration, in which learned Advocate for the respondents i.e. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mehra and Sudesh Kumar Mehra, submitted that notice is wrongly served upon them and that the property bearing Survey No.269/3 of village Mandrem did not belong to them rather belonged to Mr. Harishandra Naik (appellant herein) and therefore, notice be issued to him. Thereafter, the GCZMA decided to issue Stop Work Order Cum Show Cause Notice to the appellant- Mr. Harishandra Naik.

5. Thereafter, the GCZMA received a complaint dated 20.01.2021 from Respondent No.4- Mr. Jayant G. Naik with regard to illegally carrying out the construction of beach shack with Bar by Sunny Sunrise Beach Resort La De Su Beach, with further allegation of illegally cutting of sand dunes, illegally raising construction of retaining wall, and regarding discharge of sewage in sea in Survey No.269/3 of Junaswada, Mandrem, Pernem, Goa. Thereafter, one more complaint was received from Respondent No.4- Mr. Jayant G. Naik dated 20.01.2021 in respect of the illegal construction of structure carried out in Survey Nos.269/4, 269/5 and 269/6 of village Mandrem, Pernem, Goa by one Mr. Vithal H. Naik. An application for intervention was also filed by Respondent No.4- Mr. Jayant G. Naik.

6. In the meeting held on 30.09.2021 of the GCZMA, the Respondent Sunny Sunrise Beach Resort submitted that the structure in question has all the permissions and that the same existed prior to the year 1991. He has ground plus 2 floors as per an approved plan. The Respondent- Sunny Sunrise Beach Resort relied upon the plan and produced the same before the authority to prove that it had valid permission and that the structure was in existence prior to 1991. It was also stated that the structure in Survey No.269/4 is legal and had approval from Village Panchayat of the year 1986, wherein Village Panchayat had given permission to construct G+2 structure. The respondent- Sunny Sunrise Beach Resort also stated that the shack does not belong to him. The Authority had taken on record the application of the intervener i.e. Respondent No.4- Mr. Jayant G. Naik and that the same was allowed. The Authority after perusal of the plan, rejected the same because plan did not have the signature from the concerned Government Department. There was no date mentioned in the plan nor did it bear the signature of the owner. Thereafter, the Authority granted time to the Sunny Sunrise Beach Resort to take instructions and to make it clear on the documents to prove that the structure existed prior to 1991 and thereafter, the matter was pos

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top