1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA P.I.L. WRIT PETITION NO. 12 of 2010 Edwin Mascarenhas ... Petitioner V e r s u s The Chief Town Planner & 4 Ors. ... Respondents Mr. V. Menezes, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. A. Kakodkar, Additional Govt. Advocate for Respondent No. 1. Mr. A.N.S. Nadkarni, Senior Advocate with Mr. H.D. Naik, Advocate for Respondent No. 2. Mr. Z. De Souza, Advocate for Respondent No. 3. Mr. M.S. Sonak, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Coram: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & F.M. REIS, JJ. Date: 29 th March, 2011. P.C.: Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties. Our attention is invited by learned Counsel Mr. Menezes to two objections that the Petitioner has raised to the construction 2 at site. First, it is submitted that there is no 10 metres wide road existing at site whereas in para 7 of the affidavit of the Planning Authority, the Authority has proposed a 10 metres wide road and that does not answer the requirements of the Planning and Development Authority Regulations, 2000 and particularly part 4 thereof. It is next contended that there is no set-back as indicated in the plan namely 3.5 metres on the front side. It is submitted that by not making provisions for both, the Planning Authority has allowed the Developers to reduce the areas that are stipulated by Planning and Development Authority Regulations. 2. Both, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Planning Authority and learned Counsel Mr. Sonak appearing for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 have invited our attention to affidavits and the Regulation. It is submitted that the Developers have already decided to hand over a portion of 1.5 metres to the Planning Authority without any 3 compensation and gratuitously so as to enable the Authority to provide a 10 metres wide road. 3. Further, on instructions it is stated that front set-back would be maintained to the extent of 3.5 metres and it will be maintained without putting up any constructions or any other obstacle, so as to enable persons to alight from vehicles and that portion will be maintained as open to sky. 4. After having perused the petition, annexures and so also affidavits on record, we are satisfied that the statements made, on instructions, by the Planning Authority and Developers would meet the main objections of construction at site. Thus, 1.5 metres portion from the property of Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 shall be handed over to the Planning Authority free of costs and gratuitously to enable the Authority to carve a road of 10 metres. However, the set-back as undertaken namely to 3.5 metres will be maintained without any obstacle or any construction and that the area will be left open to the 4 sky throughout. 5. In the light of the above undertakings given by the Planning Authority and Developers to this Court and since there is no other objection at site, the petition is disposed of. However, it is directed that the completion certification will be issued by the Planning Authority only if the Builder and Developers hands over 1.5 metres of land free of costs to the Planning Authority. Moreover, the set-back area should be maintained and the Planning Authority will ensure that the same remains un-constructed and open to sky. 6. Writ Petition stands disposed of. S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. F. M. REIS, J. Ev