IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 492 OF 2009 SHRI. RAUL PRAZERES ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND 4 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. V. Rodrigues, Addl. Government Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. M. B. da Costa, Senior Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Coram:- S. J. VAZIFDAR & U. D. SALVI, JJ. Date:- 6th April, 2010 P.C. Rule, returnable and heard forthwith. 2. The action taken/to be taken as regards to the structures belonging to Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are the subject matter of the Writ Petition filed by them which is placed before the learned Single Judge namely Writ Petition No. 264/2010. 3. The only remaining grievance pertains to the footbridges. While the Collector has passed an order for the demolition thereof, the GCZMA by an order dated 19.3.2010 has observed that such wooden/bamboo footbridges have been put up by the people in that area for accessing the beach over the rivulet and they connect the main land to the beach. It is held that it is a permissible activity. Thus even if Respondent Nos.4 and 5 and not others have put up the said wooden footbridge it would make no difference. Further as stated in the order it is decided that the DSLR should be requested to survey this stretch and identify all such footbridges and then a decision be taken during next GCZMA meeting. 4. In these circumstances, and atleast at this stage we do not intend taking any further action against the footbridges. The Petitioner can always challenge the decision that may be taken as stated in the said order by filing separate proceedings. 5. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed off. S. J. VAZIFDAR, J. U. D. SALVI, J. at*