-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 187 OF 2010 Shri Vito Guilherme Gomes, Through his Attorney Holder Shri Urban T. Gomes …... Petitioner V e r s u s 1. The State of Goa through its Chief Secretary and 5 Ors. …... Respondents Mr. M. S. Joshi, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. M. Salkar, Addl. Government Advocate for Respondent no.1. Mr. H. D. Naik, Advocate for Respondent no.2. Respondent no.4 in person. Coram :- A. S. OKA F. M. REIS, JJ. Date : 17 th June, 2010. P.C. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the first Respondent and learned Counsel for the second Respondent. Fourth Respondent appears in person. 2. The grievance of the Petitioner is as regards the structure erected in open space of a housing complex which is used for composting kitchen waste (Bio degradable waste) generated in residential units in the complex. The structure has been erected by fourth to sixth Respondents. The grievance is that the structure is made without obtaining any licence. The second grievance of the Petitioner is that the same is set up behind his residential house, which is causing nuisance of the foul smell. -2- 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that reliance is placed on letters issued by the Municipal Corporation in which it is stated that the residents should identify a space approximately 5 to 10 metres within the premises of residential complex for composting of the kitchen waste (Bio- degradable waste) generated in the residential units. He submitted that there is nothing to show that licence was granted to the said structure. He submitted that the action of the fourth to sixth Respondent is creating nuisance. He invited our attention to the communication dated 31st October, 2009 issued by the Health Officer of Directorate of Health Services to the Commissioner of the third Respondent-Corporation, in which it is stated that the Office of the Health Officer has not issued NOC for the said construction. He submitted that though the Commissioner was called upon to take action, he has not taken any action. 4. We have perused the letter dated 30th September, 2009, addressed by the third Respondent-Corporation to the fifth Respondent. We have also perused letter dated 2nd December, 2009, sent by the third Respondent-Corporation to the Petitioner. In the letter dated 2nd December, 2009, it is stated thus : “With reference to the above, it is to inform that the Corporation had requested vide letter dt. 30.09.2009 (copy enclosed) for identifying a space and setting up a compost unit within a residential complex for composting of Bio- degradable waster generated from the residential units within the complex. Such units had been asked by the Corporation to be set up in the various residential colonies/complexes in the Corporation jurisdiction to process -3- and reduce the waste generated at source in absence of adequate land being made available to this Corporation. About 160 such unit have been set up in various locations in the city where waste has been treated without any problem. These composting facilities units had been asked to set up considering the direction issued by the Hon'ble High Court at Panaji in Suo Moto Writ Petition 2/2007. “ 5. Thus, what has been done by the fourth to sixth Respondent, appears to have been done in view of the directions issued by the third Respondent- Corporation. If there is any illegality in the structure erected by fourth to sixth Respondents, the third Respondent will have to take action in accordance with law. 6. As far as allegation regarding causing of nuisance to the Petitioner is concerned, the said grievance cannot be entertained in the writ jurisdiction and the remedy of the Petitioner is to approach the competent Civil Court in that behalf. 7. Subject to what is stated above, no case for interference is made out. The Petition is rejected. A. S. OKA, J. F. M. REIS, J. arp/*