IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 214 OF 2009 SAUDAGAR HOUSING SOCIETY LTD THROUGH RAZIA M. CAROL AND 5 ORS., ... Petitioners Versus M/S. CITY CONSTRUCTION THROUGH SHEIKH MOHAMMED ALI AND ANR., ... Respondents Ms. Susan Linhares, Advocate for the Petitioners. Coram:- B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. Date:- 19th June, 2009 P.C. By impugned Order, Superintendent of Survey and Land Records has found that the Government of Goa, P.W.D., Margao Municipality are interested parties for finding out the factum of possession. The plot is not recorded in the name of private party or public but only as a road and the Planning and Licensing Authority are found to have considered the said road as public road and not as private property. Therefore, as per Section 14(1) of Land Revenue Code, 1968, presence of above parties is found essential. 2. Learned Advocate for the petitioners has invited attention to Sale Deed of petitioners as also Survey Plan and urged that as per Sale Deed, a road is to be left open in the portion sold to them and that strip is in fact a six metre wide road and, it is therefore, a private road. It is urged that the plan showing the plot situation issued by Directorate of Settlement of Land Records, Margao, Goa, also shows same position. 3. The proceedings before lower authority are to take on record the road as private road. In the circumstances, it is apparent that the findings reached by lower authority in impugned Judgment cannot be labelled as erroneous or perverse. The said authority has not concluded the controversy against the petitioners. Arguments being raised before this Court are still open for consideration before lower authority and lower authority can decide the same after taking into account the defence if any of the proposed necessary parties. Being public authorities and Government they shall not raise frivolous pleas. The direction to join them, therefore, is not against the interest of petitioner and most appropriate in present facts. 4. I am, therefore, not inclined to interfere in the matter in writ jurisdiction. Petition dismissed. No costs. B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. arp/*