IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 101 OF 2009 MR. JOHN BAPTIST SEQUEIRA ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND 7 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Awadkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Kantak, Advocate General with Mr. A. Kamat, Addl. Govt. Advocate for respondents. Coram:- P. B. MAJMUDAR & U. D. SALVI, JJ. Date:- 19th March, 2009 P.C. The petition which is in the nature of PIL has been filed in connection with construction of a compound wall in survey no.164/90. The petitioner has not given any particulars as to when such construction came up. The petitioner has not pointed out as to what he is doing nor he has given his credentials. 2. In our view, this Court cannot give general directions with regard to illegal constructions coming up in the State of Goa. 3. Even in the representations made to the Sarpanch and other authority at page 11, no particulars have been given as to when the construction was made. 4. Under the circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to make representation, before the appropriate authority, if he so desires, giving proper details and facts as to the nature of the construction carried out. If such a representation is made, the concerned authority to decide the same in accordance with law. Petition disposed of accordingly. P. B. MAJMUDAR, J. U. D. SALVI, J. ef.