GOA FOUNDATION, GOA versus DIKSHA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

Citation: [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 502 · Decided: 10-11-2000 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
GOA FOUNDATION, GOA 
v. 
DIKSHA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 10, 2000 
[G.B. PATTANAIK AND UMESH C. BANERJEE, JJ.] 
Environment Protection Act, 1986: Ss. 3(1) and 3(2) (v)-Environment 
Protection Rules 1986: Rule 5(3) (d). 
Environment law-Coastal zones-Notification for regulation of 
activities-Goa Coastal zone-Permission for construction of hotel-Effect 
on environment and beach-Proposal for construction scrutinised by various 
agencies-Clearance of project given by Expert Committee and Ministry of 
Environment-Permission for construction of hotel granted after consideration 
D of relevant and germane materials-Writ challenging permission-Dismissal-
Held hotel Plot was situated in CRZ-111 under the Coastal Zone Regulation 
Notification-held there was no infraction of any of the provisions of CRZ 
Notification-There was no illegality in granting permission for construction 
of hotel. 
E 
Environmental law-Environmental protection-Need for development, 
Harmonization and balancing of these two issues-Need for. 
Environmental law-Beach-Sand and Sand dunes-Nature and impact 
of 
F 
Respondent No. 1, Mis. Diksha Holdings Pvt. Ltd. applied to Town and 
Country Planning Department for permission to the construction of a beach 
resort in Goa. The application for grant of sanction for the proposed 
construction was srcutinised by statutory agencies. The Chief Planner 
submitted its report to the Ministry of Environment and Forest stating that 
G construction of the proposed hotel will not affect environment equilibrium and 
biodiversity of coastal area. After taking opinion of the Secretary, Department 
of Science, Technology and Environment, the Ministry of Environment granted 
clearance of the project. On getting clearance from the Ministry of 
Environment and Forest, the Cancona Municipal Council granted licence for 
construction of hotel on a plot of land situated in the area of Nagorcem, 
H Palolem, Taluka-Cancona, Goa. 
502 
GOA FOUNDATION, GOA v. DIKSHA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. 
503 
The appellant-foundation, an organisation committed to preserve the A 
environment and ecology of the coastal zone, filed a writ petition before the 
Bombay High Court seeking a direction to restrain respondent No.I from 
constructing the proposed hotel. The grounds urged in support of the petition 
were: (1) Under the Notification issued by the Central Government for 
regulation of Coastal Zones in the Country, the land in question comes within B 
CRZ-1, and as such it is not permissible to have any constructions on the 
disputed plot of land; (2) the plan and sanction obtained for such construction 
from the competent authority are in contravention of the p_rovisions of the 
Environment Protection Act, 1986 and permission has been granted by the 
concerned authority without ap~lication of mind and without considering the 
relevant materials; and (3) as there exist large number of sand dunes, C 
constructions of hotel will ultimately lead to irreversible ecological damage 
of the coastal area. 
The High Court adopted a balancing approach of maintaining and 
preserving the environment and ecology of pristine beach with sand dunes 
and development of hotels and holiday resorts for economical development of D 
the State. It took into account (i) the approval of the Ministry of Environment 
. and Forest; (ii) expert committee's recommendations recommending the hotel 
project and indicating that the existing sand dunes will not be disturbed; (iii) 
several inspections carried on by the different authorities and the fact that 
the Chief Town Planner submitted its report to the Ministry of Environment E 
and Forest, stating therein that the construction of the hotel will not affect 
the sand dunes; and (iv) the report submitted by Director, Science and 
Technology. It came to the conclusion that the appropriate authority has 
ac.corded permission for construction of the hotel after consideration of 
relevant and germane materials and that the writ petitioner has failed to 
establish any illegality in the matter of grant of such permission. It recorded F 
a finding that the State Authorities as well as the Central Government were 
aware of the existance of sand dunes formation up-to 200 meters strip from 
shore line where no construction is permitted and beyond the said 200 meters 
strip within which hotel complex is proposed to be built up is under category 
CRZ III and as such there is no prohibition for construction of the hotel 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.