VINAL DIUKAR v. THE STATE OF GOA, THR. THE CHIEF SECRETARY AND 12 ORS.
Discusses statutory interpretation, the relationship between different statutes, and the application of planning regulations.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-GOA:1157-DB
Decision Date: 01-07-2025
List of Laws
Town and Country Planning Act, 1974; Goa (Regulation of Land Development and Building Construction) Act, 2008; Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulation, 2010; Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994; Goa Land Revenue Code
- Town and Country Planning Act, 1974: The judgment discusses Section 17A, which pertains to compounding of filling of land, and Section 17B, which relates to offenses regarding filling of land. The court notes that permission was granted under Section 17A for compounding filling of land considered under Section 17B. The judgment also mentions Section 37, stating that the Outline Development Plan is in operation under this section. Section 125 is mentioned in the context of compounding offenses punishable under Section 17B. Section 134 is discussed, with the court quoting subsection (2), which states that development permission under this Act overrides inconsistencies in other laws. The court interprets that the overriding effect of the TCP Act continued despite subsequent legislation. Section 44 is also discussed, regarding the need to obtain permission before construction.
- Goa (Regulation of Land Development and Building Construction) Act, 2008: The judgment refers to Section 3(2), which states that any law inconsistent with this Act or its rules stands repealed. Section 7 is mentioned as the basis for regulations. Section 8 is discussed, stating that land development and building construction must accord with regulations framed under Section 7. The court notes that the regulations framed under Section 7 govern every development in the State.
- Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulation, 2010: The judgment discusses Rule 2(20), defining "building," and Regulation 2(113), defining "road." Regulation 2(48) is discussed, defining "development." Regulation 3.1 is mentioned, stating that every development must conform to relevant laws and requires prior permission. Clause 3.2A is discussed, prescribing the application format. Clause 3.2C2 is mentioned, specifying accompaniments to applications. Regulation 3.6 is invoked, prescribing the procedure to obtain permission. Regulation 3.6.1, Category II, is mentioned regarding the procedure not being followed. The court states that the provisions of the Regulation of 2010 must be followed. Regulation 2010 is mentioned as requiring mandatory conformity to relevant Acts, Rules, and Regulations. Regulation 3.2A is mentioned regarding the application process for development permission.
- Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994: The judgment mentions that under this Act, it is for the village panchayat to assess the needs of the people.
- Goa Land Revenue Code: The judgment discusses Section 33, stating that if land is used without permission, the party may be liable to pay non-agricultural assessment.
🔒 For Members Only