The High Court of Bombay at Goa presided by Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Nivedita Mehta dismissed a PIL writ petition filed by the Goa Foundation against a starred hotel property at Miramar. The PIL writ petition sought to quash and set aside the order of the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) dated 11/03/2021 and the related decision of the GCZMA taken in its 249th meeting dated 18/02/2021 whereby it discharged proceedings in respect of the retaining wall in the property where resort is situated. The petitioner also sought to quash and set aside the Water Resources Department (WRD) report dated 04/02/2020 along with the CWPRS report dated September 2020 which had been relied on by the GCZMA to arrive at a decision on the matter.
The petitioner had earlier filed a contempt petition against the Chief Secretary, Member Secretary of GCZMA and others alleging contempt of orders of the High Court. The High Court headed by Justice G S Kulkarni and Justice B P Deshpande in terms order dated 30.09.2022 deprecated the manner in which contempt jurisdiction of the Court was invoked by the petitioner and specific observations were recorded by the Court in respect of the conduct of the petitioner in the said order dated 30.9.2022. The court observed that a decision dated March 11, 2021 adopted by the GCZMA involved a procedure based on scientific study by an expert body in the field which concluded that the retaining wall is necessary to prevent soil erosion and siltation, is in complete consonance with the earlier directions of the same court. The Court specifically observed that the decision to prevent damage to the environment as taken by the GCZMA cannot be a matter of any agitation by the petitioner who is stated to be canvassing an interest to protect the environment.
The High Court has after giving due weightage to the submissions made by the parties observed that the contempt petition was an “abuse of process of law” and imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 upon the petitioner which was directed to be payable to the Goa State Legal Services Authority. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a SLP before the Supreme Court of India but it did not interfere with the findings of the High Court and accordingly disposed of the SLP. The petitioner in another attempt seeking to reagitate the same matter once again filed PIL writ petition before the High Court which was dismissed by the High Court as being barred by principles of res judicata as the grievance raised in the present petition had already been adjudicated on 30.09.2022 by the High Court and also that such challenge to an order cannot be entertained at a belated stage. The Court observed that the petitioner, though afforded an opportunity of hearing by the GCZMA failed to point out any legal or factual lacuna in the reports based on which a decision was arrived at by the GCZMA and brought the litigation to an end