Bombay High Court
VILLAGE PANCHAYAT OF GULELI THR ITS SECRETARYversusIN RE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTIONS AND ENCROACHMENTS
- Disposal
- Disposed of
Holding
The Court held that the nodal officers must scrutinise all compliance affidavits, submit a comprehensive report within four weeks, the deadline for pending affidavits is extended by one week, and the State must pay Rs.75,000 to the amicus curiae.
Summary
The Bombay High Court, Goa, hearing a suo motu public interest litigation concerning illegal constructions and encroachments on public roads, directed the two nodal officers appointed by the Goa Government to examine compliance affidavits filed by various Panchayats, Municipalities and the Corporation and to submit a consolidated report within four weeks. The Court extended the deadline for any pending affidavits by one week and ordered that all affidavits be furnished to both the amicus curiae and the nodal officers. It also ordered the State to pay an initial remuneration of Rs.75,000 to the amicus curiae, Mr. Vithal Naik, within two weeks. All pending applications seeking further extensions of time to file affidavits were ordered to stand disposed. The matter was listed again for further directions on 6 April 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a transparent mechanism should be instituted to monitor the activities of the nodal officers and ensure compliance with the Court’s orders on illegal constructions.
- Whether the deadline for filing compliance affidavits should be extended for the Panchayats, Municipalities and the Corporation.
- Whether remuneration should be awarded to the amicus curiae for assistance rendered to the Court.
Subjects
- illegal constructions
- encroachments
- public interest litigation
- nodal officers
- compliance monitoring
- affidavit filing
- amicus curiae remuneration
- Goa
Judgment
40 PILSM 3 2024
Vinita
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (SUO MOTU) NO.3 OF
2024 WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.1597 OF 2025 (F),
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1709 OF 2025 (F),
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1736 OF 2025 (F),
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1754 OF 2025 (F),
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2095 OF 2025 (F),
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.378 OF 2025,
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2555 OF 2025 (F),
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2557 OF 2025 (F)
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (SUO MOTU) NO.3
OF 2024
IN RE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTIONS AND
ENCROACHMENTS ... PETITIONER
Versus
THE STATE OF GOA THROUGH ITS CHIEF
SECRETARY ... RESPONDENTS
WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.1597 OF 2025 (F)
GEETANJALI BHUPENDRASINH
RAJEBHOSALE ... PETITIONER
Versus
VILLAGE PANCHAYAT OF ONA
MAULINGUEM CURCHOREM
THR. ITS SECRETARY AND 4 ORS ...RESPONENTS
WITH
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1709 OF 2025 (F)
VILLAGE PANCHAYAT OF POMBURPA
OLAULIM THR. ITS SECRETARY ... APPLICANT
Versus
NO PARTY ... RESPONDENTS
WITH
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1736 OF 2025 (F)
VILLAGE PANCHAYAT OF GUIRIM ... APPLICANT
Versus
NO PARTY ... RESPONDENTS
WITH
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1754 OF 2025 (F)
THE VILLAGE PANCHAYAT OF NERUL
THR. ITS SECRETARY ... APPLICANT
Versus
Page 1 of 8
17th February, 2026
40 PILSM 3 2024
NO PARTY ... RESPONDENTS
WITH
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2095 OF 2025 (F)
THE VILLAGE PANCHAYAT OF MORLEM
THR. ITS SECRETARY ... APPLICANT
Versus
IN RE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTIONS AND
ENCROACHMENTS ... RESPONDENTS
WITH
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.378 OF 2025
VILLAGE PANCHAYAT OF GULELI THR
ITS SECRETARY ... APPLICANT
Versus
IN RE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTIONS AND
ENCROACHMENTS ... RESPONDENTS
WITH
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2555 OF 2025 (F)
VILLAGE PANCHAYAT MACAZANA
THROUGH ... APPLICANT
Versus
THE STATE OF GOA THROUGH ITS
CHIEF SECRETARY ... RESPONDENTS
WITH
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2557 OF 2025 (F)
VILLAGE PANCHAYAT
GUIRDOLIM THROUGH ... APPLICANT
Versus
THE STATE OF GOA THROUGH
ITS CHIEF ... RESPONDENTS
Mr Vithal Naik, Amicus Curiae.
Mr Venkatesh Nayak Salatry, Advocate for Village Panchayat of
Assagao through VC.
Mr Devidas J. Pangam, Advocate General with Ms Maria
correia and Mr Shubham Priolkar, Additional Government
Advocates for Respondent Nos.1 to 4, 6 to 8, 12, 13, 15 and 19.
Mr Parag Rao, Mr Akhil Parrikar and Mr Shulin Singbal,
Advocates for Margao Municipal Council and Village Panchayat
of Ponda, Poriem, Nagargao, Bhironda, Mauxi, Sanvordem,
Cotorem, Amona and Querim.
Mr K. Panchal, Advocate for Village Panchayat of Batim,
Curca-Bambolim, Bastora, Cortalim and Quelossim.
Mr Ivan Santimano, Advocate for Village Panchayat of Nuvem,
Page 2 of 8
17th February, 2026
40 PILSM 3 2024
Guddi Paroda and Macasana.
Mr. Anand Shirodkar, Advocate for City of Corporation
of Panaji (CCP). Ms Annelise Fernandes and
Ms Kalpa Govekar, Advocates for Respondent Nos. 10,
118 and 135.
Mr B. Oliveira, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 167, 159,
198 and 202 (Village Panchayat of Cana-Benaulim,
Xeldem and Quitol-Fatorpa) through VC.
Mr Jatin Ramaiya with Mr Pradeep Kashyap and Mr
Omkar Parab, Advocates for Village Panchayat of
Veling-Priol, Shiroda, Borim, Bandora, Bhoma and
Quela.
Mr Vinoj K. Daniel, Advocate for Respondent
No.172 (Village Panchayat of Navelim).
Mr Sameer Khedekar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.140,
141, 142, 143 and 144.
Mr Pankaj Pai Vernekar with Mr B. Fatarpekar,
Advocates for Village Panchayat of Candolim, Parra,
Azossim-Mandur and St. Estevem.
Mr Kapil D. Kerkar, Advocate for Village Panchayat
of Nadora and Colvale through VC.
Mr Zeller D'Souza, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 146,
152, 153 and 157 (Village Panchayat of Chicalim,
Sancoale, Velsao and Assolna).
Mr Sanman Keny, Advocate for Village Panchayat of
Orlim through VC. Ms Pritika D. Shirodkar, Advocate for
Mormugao Municipal Council.
Mr R. Sahakari, Advocate for Village Panchayat of
Assolda, Xelvona, Xic Xelvona, Ambaulim, Avedem,
Cotombi-Chaifi, Balli-Adnem, Barem- Quepem,
Cavorem-Pirla, Molcornem, Naqueri-Betul and Morpila
through VC.
Mr G. Teles with Ms. R. Ballari, Advocates for Village
Panchayat of St. Lawrence.
Mr P. A. Kamat, Advocate for Village Panchayat of
Calangute, Taleigao, Reis Magos, Pilerne, Siolim-Marna,
Corlim, St. Andre, Goa Velha, Anjuna-Caisua, Marcaim,
Neura, Palem-Siridao, Loliem, Poinguinim, Agonda and
Cola.
Mr Prayash Shirodkar, Advocate for Municipality of
Cuncolim, Bicholim and Mapusa.
Mr Amey Phadte, Advocate for Village Panchayat of Oxel
and Siolim.
Mr Shivam S. Fadte with Mr. Gaurang Panandikar,
Page 3 of 8
17th February, 2026
40 PILSM 3 2024
Advocates for Respondent Nos. 46, 54, 43, 50, 47, 52, 48,
39, 53, 45, 42 (Village Panchayat of Surla, Navelim,
Harvalem, Pale-Cotombi, Pilgao, Kudnem, Naroa,
Velguem, Mulgao, Advalpal, Salem, Menkurem
Dhumashe and Sirgao).
Mr T. V. Patel, Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 168,
182, 184, 155, 166 and 180 through VC.
Mr Om D'Costa, Advocate for the Respondent No. 149.
Mr B. Oliveira holding for Mr T. Kamalkar, Advocates
for Sanguem Municipality through VC.
Mr Jeet Volvoikar with Mr Sagar Rivankar and Mr
Siddhant Karpe, Advocates for Respondent No.8.
Mr Pradosh Dangui, Advocate for Village Panchayat of
Morlem and V.P. Gulali.
Mr Nigel Fernandes, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 106, 109
And 116.
Mr Laxman Pednekar with Ms. Ketaki Pednekar,
Advocates for Respondent Nos. 16, 31 and 35.
Mr V. Sardessai, Advocate for Village Panchayat of
Guirim, Pomburpa and Sangolda.
Mr Parikshit Sawant, Advocate for Village Panchayat
of Arpora and Nagoa.
Ms Marie Rosette Pereira, Advocate for Canacona Municipal
Council.
Mr Eeshan Usapkar with Mr Sayeel Lingudkar,
Advocates for Respondent Nos. 88, 97 and 104 (Village
Panchayat of Prina, Sirsaim and Carambolim).
Mr Omkar Kulkar, Advocate for Respondent No.100.
Mr J. Mulgaonkar and Ms S. Parulekar, Advocates for the
Petitioner in CP No.1597/2025/F
Ms Nehal Shirodkar, Advocate for one of the Respondents.
CORAM:- SUMAN SHYAM &
AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, JJ.
DATED :- 17th February, 2026
P.C.
Noticing the rampant illegal constructions and encroachments
on public roads and public spaces in the State of Goa, the present
Page 4 of 8
17th February, 2026
40 PILSM 3 2024
Suo Motu Public Interest Litigation came to be registered. Various
orders have been passed by this Court from time to time in this
proceeding.
2. By order dated 06.03.2025, this Court had identified
several categories constituting instances of violation and/or
non-compliance of the Court's directions, which are
required to be assessed and monitored.
3. In order to implement the directions passed by this
Court, the Government of Goa has appointed two Nodal
Officers, delineating their duties and functions, by issuing
separate orders of appointment. The question that arises for
consideration today is pertaining to the need to evolve a
transparent mechanism to monitor the activities of the Nodal
Officers and to ascertain effective compliance of the orders of
this Court.
4. Various suggestions have been advanced by the learned
Counsel appearing for the parties, including the learned
Amicus Curiae, Mr Vithal Naik, and Mr Devidas Pangam,
learned Advocate General for the State. We have considered the
same.
5. After considering the submission made at the Bar, to
begin with, this Court is of the opinion that compliance in
Page 5 of 8
17th February, 2026
40 PILSM 3 2024
respect of roadside illegal constructions falling within the First
and Second category of violation, as noted in the order dated
06.03.2025, should be looked into.
6. We, therefore, direct the two Nodal Officers so
appointed, to examine the compliance affidavits filed by the
concerned Panchayats/Municipalities/Corporation and
thereafter, submit a consolidated, comprehensive report,
indicating the extent of compliance with the orders of this
Court. The said report shall be submitted within a period of
four weeks from today. The hard copy of the report shall be
furnished to the learned Amicus Curiae, and the soft copy shall
be emailed to the learned Counsel appearing for the respective
parties, who are to furnish their respective email IDs to both
the Nodal Officers, within one week from today.
7. It has been brought to our notice that though certain
Panchayats/Municipalities have filed affidavits purporting to
show compliance with the Court's orders, yet, several
Panchayats/ Municipalities/Corporations are yet to file their
affidavits. The time granted earlier for filing such affidavits has
already expired. Therefore, several Interim Applications have
been filed seeking extension of time to file affidavits.
8. In view thereof, we direct that the remaining
Panchayats/Municipalities/Corporation shall file their
Page 6 of 8
17th February, 2026
40 PILSM 3 2024
affidavits in terms of the earlier orders of this Court within one
week from today. Time for filing affidavit stands extended
accordingly. Copies of such affidavits shall be furnished not
only to the learned Amicus Curiae but also to the respective
Nodal Officers. Upon receipt of the said affidavits, the two
Nodal Officers shall examine the same and submit their
reports.
9. Before parting, with the record, we place on record
our appreciation for the assistance rendered by the learned
Amicus Curiae. Considering the time, effort, and work that
would have to be undertaken by the learned Amicus Curiae so
as to render assistance to the Court in the present matter, we
are of the view that suitable remuneration ought to be paid to
him by the State.
10. Taking note of the suggestion made by the learned
Advocate General, Goa, we direct that an amount of
Rs.75,000/- be paid to Mr. Vithal Naik, as an initial deposit for
the assistance rendered by him to this Court. The said amount
shall be paid by the State Government within a period of two
weeks from today by Demand Draft/Bank transfer.
11. In view of the present order, all pending applications
seeking extension of time to file affidavit filed by the various
Panchayats, Municipalities, and the Corporation shall stand
Page 7 of 8
17th February, 2026
40 PILSM 3 2024
disposed of.
12. List the matter again on 06.04.2026 for further directions.
AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, J. SUMAN SHYAM, J.
Signed by: VINITA VIKAS NAIK
Designation: Private Secretary
Page 8 of 8
Date: 23/02/2026 18:32:10
17th February, 2026
Checking your session…