:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NOS. 267 & 322 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO. 267 OF 2005 Shri Pramod S. Dabolkar, resident of Dona Vaddo, Saligao, Bardez Goa. …. Petitioner V e r s u s 1. Senior Town Planner, Town & Country Planning Department, Mapusa, Bardez Goa. 2. Chief Town Planner, State of Goa, having Office at Dempo Towers, Patto, Panaji Goa. 3. Town and Country Planning Board, Government of Goa, having office at Dempo Towers, Patto, Panaji Goa. 4. State of Goa, through its Chief Secretary, having office at Secretariat, Panaji. 5. Communidade of Serula, through its Attorney, having office at Porvorim, Bardez Goa, to be served to the Administrator of Communidade of North Zone, Mapusa, Bardez Goa. :2: 6. Village Panchayat of Soccorro, through its Sarpanch, Soccorro, Bardez Goa. … Respondents. Mr. M. Sonak, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Mr. G. Shirodkar, Government Advocate for respondent nos. 1 to 4. AND WRIT PETITION NO. 322 OF 2005 1. Shri Louis Antonio Fernandes, r/o Vaddem, Soccorro, Bardez Goa. 2. Shri Mario Stephen Do Rosario Vaz, r/o Soccorro, Maina, P.O. Porvorim, Bardez Goa. 3. Shri Bosco Severino Do Rosario Vaz, r/o Soccorro, Maina, Bardez Goa. 4. Shri Sushant P. Narvekar, r/o Bandarwada, Chapora, Bardez Goa. 5. Shri Dayanand Harmarlkar, r/o Muddevado, Saligao, Bardez Goa. 6. Shri Manoj L. Chandelkar, r/o Sangolda Road, Near Water Tank, Alto Porvorim, Bardez Goa. … Petitioners V e r s u s 1. The Senior Town Planner, Town & Country Planning Department, Government of Goa, Mapusa, Bardez Goa. :3: 2. Chief Town Planner, Government of Goa, having Office at Dempo Towers, Patto, Panaji Goa. 3. State of Goa, through its Chief Secretary, having office at Secretariat, Porvorim, Bardez Goa. 4. Communidade of Serula, through its Attorney, having office at Porvorim, Bardez Goa, to be served to the Administrator of Communidades of North Zone, Mapusa, Bardez Goa. 5. Village Panchayat of Soccorro, through its Sarpanch, having office at Soccorro, Bardez Goa. … Respondents. Mr. M. Sonak, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Mr. G. Shirodkar, Government Advocate for respondent nos. 1 to 3. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE & F. M. REIS, JJ. DATE : 9 th JUNE, 2011 . ORAL JUDGMENT ( Per S. A. BOBDE, J) The grievance in these two petitions relates to the order of the Panaji Planning and Development Authority by which development permission dated 22.10.2003 was :4: cancelled. Thereafter, the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 267 of 2005 preferred an appeal before the Town and Country Planning Board, State of Goa, Panaji, which has been summarily rejected without giving any reason by order dated 10.12.2004. 2. Having regard to the undisputed position in law that the Town and Country Planning Board was wrong in deciding the appeal without giving any reasons and since no reason of any kind has been given, the said appellate order must be liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Town and Country Planning Board for fresh decision in accordance with law. 3. The petitioners in the other Writ Petition No. 322 of 2005 approached this Court directly against the order of the Panaji Planning and Development Authority without preferring an appeal to the Town and Country Planning Board. Hence, we do not propose to entertain it in view of the alternate remedy available to the petitioners. The petitioners may either file an appeal or apply for being impleaded in the appeal which we have remanded earlier. The Town and :5: Country Planning Board shall not raise the question of limitation with regard to the said petition. 4. Rule is made absolute in above terms. S. A. BOBDE, J F. M. REIS, J at*