IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 491 OF 2006 SHRI LAWRENCE D'SOUZA, PERNEM GOA. ....Petitioner Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH ITS CHIEF ....Respondents SECRETARY AND 2 ORS., Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar,Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. W. Coutinho, GA for R.1 and 2. Mr. M. S. Sonak for R.3. Coram:- J. N. PATEL, J. Date:- 23rd November, 2006 P.C.: Heard. 2. Learned GA makes a statement that the respondent Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority would hear the petitioner afresh in the matter and take a decision in accordance with law. In view of this statement, the impugned Order is quashed and set aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to hear the petitioner and take a decision in the matter in accordance with law. Needless to say that at the time of hearing, respondent No.2 would consider all the documents before taking a final decision in the matter as this is for the second time that the order passed by respondent No.2 is required to be quashed and set aside on the ground that they have failed to consider the documents tendered by the petitioner in proper perspective and have proceeded to pass the impugned order. With these observations, the impugned Order is quashed and set aside. Respondent No.2 to take a decision within a period of eight weeks from the date of first appearance of the petitioner. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. J. N. PATEL, J. sl.