Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

MARIA AMABEL MASCARENHAS LOBO CLEMENTE AND ANRversusSTATE OF GOA THR ITS CHIEF SECRETARY AND 5 ORS

Disposal
Disposed of

Holding

The order dated 16 May 2025 of the Goa Town and Country Planning Board is quashed and set aside.

Summary

The petitioners, Maria Amabel Mascarenhas Lobo and Clemente, challenged an order dated 16 May 2025 passed by the Goa Town and Country Planning Board, alleging they were not given an opportunity to be heard. They contended that the Board violated the principles of natural justice by proceeding without a hearing. The High Court examined the claim and found merit in the allegation that procedural fairness was not observed. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned Board order. The matter was remanded to the Board to conduct a fresh hearing for the petitioners and respondents Nos. 4 and 5, with a directive to decide within eight weeks. All other issues raised in the petition were left open, and the petition was thereafter disposed of.

Issues considered

  • Whether the Goa Town and Country Planning Board violated the principles of natural justice by not hearing the petitioners before passing its order dated 16 May 2025
  • Whether the impugned order should be set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh hearing

Subjects

  • natural justice
  • procedural fairness
  • administrative law
  • quash order
  • remand
  • planning board

Judgment

2026:BHC-GOA:1774-DB
                                            19 WP 447 2025

                Meena

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
                               WRIT PETITION NO.447 OF 2025

           MARIA AMABEL MASCARENHAS LOBO
           CLEMENTE AND ANR                                       ... PETITIONERS
             Versus
           STATE OF GOA THR ITS CHIEF
           SECRETARY AND 5 ORS                                    ... RESPONDENTS


           Mr. Nigel Da Costa Frias, Ms. M. Fernandes and Ms Barbara
           Andrade, Advocates for the Petitioner

           Ms. Sapna Mordekar, Additional Government Advocate for
           Respondent Nos.1, 6 and 9.

           Mr. Manish Salkar, Government Advocate for Respondent No.2.

           Ms. Maria Viegas, Advocate and Ms. Jonathan George,
           Advocate (through VC) for Respondent No.4 and 5.


                                CORAM:- VALMIKI MENEZES &
                                        AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, JJ.
                                DATED :- 2nd September, 2026

           P.C.:


           1.      Mr. Salkar, learned Government Advocate, on instructions of
           Respondent No.2, submits that the Petitioners were in fact not
           heard before the Board passed an order dated 16.05.2025.


           2.    Considering the statement made and the grievance made in the
           petition that the principles of natural justice were not followed, the

                                                Page 1 of 2
                                            2nd September, 2026
                                                      19 WP 447 2025


                    impugned order dated 16.05.2025 of the Board is quashed and set
                    aside. The matter shall stand remanded to the Goa Town and
                    Country Planning Board to afford the Petitioner and Respondent
                    Nos. 4 and 5 a fresh hearing after which the Board shall take its
                    decision. The Board is requested to dispose of the matter after
                    hearing these parties preferably within a period of eight weeks. All
                    other issues raised in the petition are left open.


                    3. The petition stands disposed of.



                      AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, J.                     VALMIKI MENEZES, J.




Signed by: MEENA VISHAL BHOIR
Designation: Private Secretary
                                                          Page 2 of 2
Date: 03/09/2026 12:12:47
                                                      2nd September, 2026


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.