1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO.861 OF 2009 1. Shri Kashinath Ganu Dabholkar, since deceased represented by his legal heirs, (a) Smt. Sudha Gurudas Dabholkar, Major of age, housewife, (b) Smt. Kavita Sudhakar Dabholkar, Major of age, housewife, (c) Shri Bhagirath Kashinath Dabholkar, S/o. late Kashinath Dabholkar, Major of age, and his wife, (d) Smt. Babita Bhagirath Dabholkar, Major of age, housewife, All r/o. Titowado Nerul, (House no. not known) Nerul Bardez, Goa. (e) Smt. Chaya Kishor Patre, d/o. late Kashinath Dabholkar, major of age, and her husband, (f) Shri Kishor Patre, Major of age, Both r/o. Sodiem Siolim, Bardez, Goa (House no. not known) (g) Smt. Vishranti Krishna Shirodkar, d/o. late Kashinath Dabholkar, major of age and her husband, (h) Shri Krishna Shirodkar, Major of age, Both r/o. Oxel Siolim Bardez, Goa, (house no. not known) 2 (i) Smt. Bhavana Suhas Govenkar, d/o. late Kashinath Dabholkar, major of age, and her husband. (j) Shri Suhas Rohidas Govenkar, Major of age, Both r/o. Wadi Merces Tiswadi, (House no. not known) 2. Smt. Muktabai Kashinath Dabholkar, Widow of late Kashinath Dabholkar, Housewife, 3. Shri Sudhakar Kashinath Dabholkar, s/o. late Kashinath Dabholkar, 4. Shri Gurudas Kashinath Dabholkar, S/o. late Kashinath Dabholkar, all major of age and r/o. Titowado Nerul Bardez Goa (house no. not known) .… Petitioners V/s 1. Shri Vishwanath G. Dabholkar, s/o. of late Ganu Dabholkar, married, (since deceased, through his legal representatives) (a) Smt. Bhanumati Vishwanath Dabholkar, Housewife, Both major of age and r/o. H.No.398, Titowada, Nerul, Bardez, Goa. (b) Shri Rajendra Vishwanath Dabholkar, s/o. late Vishwanath Dabholkar, major of age, married and his wife (c) Smt. Radhika Rajendra Dabholkar, d/o. Ganpat Agarpurkar, major of age, housewife. 3 (d) Shri Avinash Vishwanath Dabholkar, s/o. late Vishwanath Dabholkar, major of age, married and his wife, (e) Smt. Aswini Avinash Dabholkar, d/o. Mukund Chimulkar, major of age, unmarried, (f) Miss Lata Vishwanath Dabholkar, d/o. late Vishwanath Dabholkar, major of age, unmarried. All residents of H.No.398, Titawada, Nerul Bardez, Goa. (g) Smt. Seema Sandeep Naik, d/o. late Vishwanath Dabholkar, major of age, married and her husband, (h) Shri Sandeep Sada Naik, s/o. Sada Naik, Major of age, Both r/o. H.No.35, Velap, Kapileshwari, Ponda, Goa. (i) Smt. Dixita Dnyaneshwar Naik, d/o. late Vishwanath Dabholkar, Major of age, married and her husband, (j) Shri Dnyaneshwar Babuso Naik, s/o. Babuso Naik, major of age, Both r/o. H.No.1412, near Chuhjan Samaj temple, Parampai Madkai-Ponda-Goa. (k) Smt. Sanika Pandurang Naik, d/o. late Vishwanath Dabholkar, major of age, married and her husband, (l) Shri Pandurang Surya Naik, s/o. Surya Naik, major of age, both r/o. H.No.1516, 4 Khadpaband, Ponda, Goa. (m) Smt. Megha Mahendra Naik, d/o. late Vishwanath Dabholkar, major of age, married, housewife and her husband, (n) Shri Mahendra Babuso Naik, s/o. Babuso Naik, Major of age, Both residents of H.No.396, Opp. Mhalsa temple, Mardol, Ponda, Goa. (o) Miss Sajita V. Dabholkar, d/o. late Vishwanath Dabholkar, major of age, unmarried, (p) Miss Chandan V. Dabholkar, d/o. late Vishwanath Dabholkar, major of age, unmarried, both residents of H.No.398, Titawada, Nerul, Bardez, Goa. 2. Shri Rafael D'Souza, Major of age, married, 3. Mr. Jacinto Tania Pia Carmo D'Zouza, Major of age, 4. Mr. Aleixo Sebastiao Devere Armando de D'Souza, Major of age, 5. Mr. Angelo D'Souza, Major of age, 6. Mrs. Evelina De Souza, major of age, married, All residents of Tintowado, Nerul, Bardez, Goa. …. Respondents 5 Shri Anthony D'silva, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri S.D. Lotlikar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sudha Pai Kir, Advocate for Respondents no.1(a) to 1(p). CORAM : F.M. REIS, J. DATE : 18th NOVEMBER, 2011 JUDGMENT : Heard Shri A. D'Silva, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri S.D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents. Shri Anthony D'Silva, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners points out that the matter can be heard as according to him the remaining respondents are only the formal parties and have not appeared before the Courts below. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Shri S.D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel waives service on behalf of respondents no. 1(a) to 1(p). 3. The above petition challenges the orders passed by the Administrative Tribunal as well as the Deputy Collector whereby the order passed by the Mamlatdar allowing the application of the petitioners to purchase the area of the dwelling house admeasuring an area of 300 square metres came to be set aside on the ground 6 that an area which was already purchased by the respondents was overlapping with the area claimed by the petitioners. 4. During the hearing of the above petition, Shri S.D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents has fairly submitted that the respondents have no objection nor any claim to any area beyond the area of 300 square metres purchased by the respondents pursuant to the Purchase Certificate of the year 1994 which includes the dwelling house of the respondents. 5. Shri Anthony D'Silva, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners pointed out that the petitioners are satisfied provided they get 300 square metres of the land which they have opted in their Purchase Application beyond the area of 300 square metres purchased by the respondents pursuant to the said Purchase Application. 6. Considering the submissions of both the learned Counsel, the grounds on which the impugned orders have been passed by the Administrative Tribunal as well as the Deputy Collector to the effect that the area sought to be purchased by the petitioners would 7 overlap with the area purchased by the respondents pursuant to the said Purchase Certificate does not survive. As such, the impugned judgments passed by the Administrative Tribunal as well as the Deputy Collector deserve to be quashed and set aside and the learned Mamlatdar is to be directed to demarcate the area purchased pursuant to the order dated 28/03/1996 admeasuring an area of 300 square metres beyond the area of 300 square metres purchased by the respondents pursuant to the said Purchase Certificate dated 26/04/1994. Learned Senior Counsel, in fact, does not object if such demarcation is effected by the learned Mamlatdar provided the area of 300 square metres purchased by the respondents pursuant to the said Purchase Certificate is kept intact. Shri Anthony D'Silva, upon instructions, also points out that the petitioners have no claim over the area of 300 square metres purchased by the respondents pursuant to the Purchase Certificate. 7. Considering the above, I pass the following order: ORDER (i) The impugned judgment of the Administrative Tribunal dated 4/08/2006 and the Deputy Collector dated 19/02/1998 are quashed and set aside. 8 (ii) The learned Mamlatdar is directed to demarcate the area of 300 square metres allowed to be purchased pursuant to the order dated 28/03/1996 beyond an area of 300 square metres purchased by the respondents pursuant to the Purchase Certificate dated 26/04/1994. (iii) Rule is disposed of in the above terms. (iv) Petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. (v) Parties are directed to appear before the learned Mamlatdar on 20/12/2011 at 10.30 a.m. F.M. REIS, J. NH/-