Non-Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

IA NO. 2 OF 2008

IN  

CIVIL APPEAL NO.5281 AND 5282 OF 2008 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.16728 and 19767 of 2008)

Goan Real Estate & Construction  Ltd. & Anr.       … Appellants

Versus

People’s Movement for Civic  Action & Ors.       … Respondents

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO.5282 OF 2008 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.19767 of 2008)

J U D G M E N T

J.M. Panchal, J.

1. By filing this application, the respondents, i.e., People’s  

Movement for Civic Action and others have prayed to clarify

that the order dated August 28, 2008 passed in Civil Appeal  

No.5282 of 2008 which arose out of SLP (C) No.19767 of 2008  

was directed against the order of status quo granted by the  

High Court of Bombay at Goa on July 10, 2008 and was not  

directed  against  the  order  dated  August  5,  2008  by  which  

original petitioners were permitted to amend Writ Petition (C)  

No.403 of 2007 to enable them to challenge the order dated  

October  30,  2007  passed  by  National  Coastal  Zone  

Management Authority.  It is further prayed that in view of the  

order dated August 28, 2008, it be declared that the Transfer  

Petition No.758 of 2008 and the Writ  Petition (C)  No.329 of  

2008 which, according to the respondents are on the same  

subject matter, have become infructuous and would not come  

in  the  way of  the  High Court  in  deciding  the  pending  writ  

petition at the earliest.   

2. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties  

and considered the record of Civil Appeal No.5281 of 2008 and  

Civil Appeal No.5282 of 2008.

3. Civil  Appeal  no.5281  of  2008  arose  out  of  SLP  (C)  

No.16728 of 2008 which was directed against order dated July  

2

10, 2008 rendered by the High Court of  Bombay at Goa in  

Miscellaneous Civil Application No.861 of 2007 which was filed  

in  writ  petition  No.403  of  2007  by  which  the  parties  were  

directed  to  maintain  status  quo  in  respect  of  construction  

within 50 meter to 100 meters of High Tide Line on survey  

No.12/1 and 99/2  situated near river Juari at Goa till  the  

matter was finally heard by the Court.

4. After  hearing  the  learned counsel  for  the  parties,  Civil  

Appeal  No.5281  of  2008  was  decided  by  judgment  dated  

August 28, 2008 and the appeal was partly allowed.  The order  

impugned in the appeal was set aside and the appellants were  

permitted to complete the incomplete construction work done  

by them at their own risk and cost during the pendency of the  

petition before the High Court of Bombay at Goa.  Further the  

High Court was requested to dispose of the matter on merits  

without  being inhibited  by  the  order  of  this  Court  granting  

interim  relief  to  the  appellants,  as  early  as  possible  and  

without any avoidable delay.  The record would indicate that  

Civil Appeal No.5282 of 2008 arising out of SLP (C) No.19767  

of 2008 was directed against the order dated August 5, 2008  

3

by  which  the  writ  petitioners  before  the  High  Court  were  

permitted to amend Writ  Petition No.  403 of  2007 so as to  

enable them to challenge the legality of order dated October  

30, 2007 passed by the National Coastal Zone Management  

Authority.  After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,  

judgment in Civil Appeal No. 5282 of 2008 was pronounced on  

August 28, 2008.  The copy of the judgment in Civil Appeal  

no.,5282 of 2008, annexed by the petitioners along with the  

instant application indicates that by mistake it was mentioned  

in the judgment that the appeal  was directed against  order  

passed by the High Court  requiring the parties to maintain  

status quo.  There is no manner of doubt that factually an  

incorrect  statement  has  crept  in  the  judgment  rendered  in  

Civil Appeal No. 5282 of 2008.  Therefore, the application will  

have to be accepted in part by making necessary clarifications.  

The prayer made by the petitioners in the instant application  

to declare that in view of the order dated August 28, 2008, the  

Transfer Petition No. 758 of 2008 and the Writ Petition Civil  

No.329 of 2008 have become infructuous and would not come  

in the way of the High Court while deciding the pending writ  

4

petition, cannot be granted.  As observed earlier, Civil Appeal  

No. 5281 of 2008 was directed against the order dated July  

10, 2008 requiring the parties to maintain status quo.  Writ  

Petition  Civil  No.329  of  2008  was  instituted  seeking  a  

declaration  that  the  building  plans  sanctioned  and  

constructions  made  as  well  as  on-going  constructions,  

pursuant  to  the  Coastal  Regulation  Zone  Notification  dated  

February  19,  1991  as  amended  by  the  Notification  dated  

August 16, 1994 issued by the Central Government are valid.  

By  filing  Transfer  Petition  (C)  No.  758  of  2008,  Goan  Real  

Estate  and Constructions  Ltd.  and Another  have  prayed  to  

transfer the proceedings of PIL Writ Petition No.403 of 2007  

titled as  People’s Movement for Civic Action & Anr. Vs.  Goa  

Coastal Management Authority & Ors. pending before the High  

Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Goa, Panaji to this  

Court  and to hear the said Writ  Petition along with Special  

Leave  Petition  (Civil)  No.16728  of  2008  which  was  pending  

before this Court.  This Court notices that the subject matters  

of all the proceedings are different.  Writ Petition (C) No.329 of  

2008 has been heard and disposed of by a reasoned judgment.  

5

Having regard to the  facts of  the case,  this  Court  is  of  the  

opinion  that  it  is  wrong  to  suggest  that  Transfer  Petition  

No.758 of  2008 and Writ  Petition  (C)  No.329  of  2008  have  

become  infructuous  in  view  of  the  order  dated  August  28,  

2008 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal No.5281 of 2008.  

Therefore, the second prayer made in the instant application is  

liable to be dismissed.

5. For  the  foregoing  reasons,  the  application  is  partly  

allowed.   The order dated August 28,  2008, passed by this  

Court in Civil Appeal No. 5282 of 2008, is hereby recalled and  

it  is clarified that Civil  Appeal  No.  5281 of  2008 dealt  with  

order  dated  July  10,  2008  passed  by  the  High  Court  of  

Bombay at Goa in Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 866 of  

2007 which was filed in writ petition No. 403 of 2007 requiring  

the parties to maintain status quo whereas Civil Appeal No.  

5282 of 2008 dealt with order dated August 5, 2008 rendered  

by the High Court of Bombay at Goa in Civil  Miscellaneous  

Application No. 595 of 2008, which was filed in writ petition  

No. 403 of 2007 permitting the original petitioners to amend  

the  Writ  Petition  No.403  of  2007  so  as  to  enable  them  to  

6

challenge order dated October 30,  2007 passed by National  

Coastal Zone Management Authority.  The second prayer made  

in the application is rejected.

6. In  view  of  the  abovementioned  clarification,  the  order  

dated August 28, 2008 passed in Civil Appeal No.5282 of 2008  

is  recalled.  Once the said order is recalled, this Court  will  

have to consider the question whether the order dated August  

5,  2008  permitting  the  original  petitioners  to  amend  the  

petition so as to enable them to challenge order dated October  

30,  2007  passed  by  National  Coastal  Zone  Management  

Authority, which was challenged in Civil Appeal No. 5282 of  

2008, should be upheld by this Court.  However, this Court  

notices that validity of order dated October 30, 2007, passed  

by  the  National  Coastal  Zone  Management  Authority,  is  

upheld by this Court in the judgment delivered in Writ Petition  

(Civil) No. 329 of 2008.  Therefore, the order dated August 5,  

2008,  passed  by  the  High  Court,  permitting  the  original  

petitioners to amend Writ Petition No. 403 of 2007, so as to  

enable them to challenge the legality of order dated October  

30, 2007, passed by the National Coastal Zone Management  

7

Authority has become infructuous and Civil Appeal No. 5282  

of 2008 also will have to be disposed of accordingly.

7. For the foregoing reasons, Civil Appeal no.5282 of 2008  

is disposed of as having become infructuous.  The application  

as  well  as  Civil  Appeal  No.5282  of  2008  stand  accordingly  

disposed of.  There shall be no order as to costs in both the  

proceedings.

………………………CJI.

…………………………J. [J.M. Panchal]

New Delhi; March 31, 2010.

8