GOAN REAL ESTATE & CONSTRN.LD.. vs UNION OF INDIA TR.SEC.MIN.OF ENV.. — W.P.(C) No. 329/2008
Case under Section PIL-W. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010209572008
Filing Date
25-Jul-2008
Registration No
W.P.(C) No. 329/2008
Diary Number
20957/2008
Order Date
07-Apr-2014
Document Type
ROP
Disposal Type
Disposed Off
Last updated 05-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GOAN REAL ESTATE & CONSTRN.LD..
Adv. E. C. AGRAWALA
Respondent(s)
-
1.UNION OF INDIA TR.SEC.MIN.OF ENV..
Adv. ANITHA SHENOY (Dead / Retired / Elevated) MANJULA GUPTA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-Apr-2014
ROPView PDF
-
31-Mar-2010
JudgmentView PDF
-
31-Mar-2010
Judgment - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Mar-2010
JudgmentView PDF
-
31-Mar-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Mar-2010
ROPView PDF
-
31-Mar-2010
ROPView PDF
-
19-Jan-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Dec-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Nov-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
26-Oct-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
14-Sep-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Aug-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Jul-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-Jul-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
01-May-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Mar-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-Mar-2009
ROPView PDF
-
17-Feb-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
28-Nov-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Nov-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Oct-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Oct-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Oct-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
28-Aug-2008
Judgment - of Main CaseView PDF
-
28-Aug-2008
JudgmentView PDF
-
28-Aug-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Aug-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
28-Jul-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Jul-2008
Case filed
Registration No. W.P.(C) No. 329/2008
-
16-Jul-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
Case Summary: W.P.(C) No. 329/2008 On April 7, 2014, the Supreme Court heard Interim Application No. 3 in the writ petition filed by Goan Real Estate & Construction Ltd. against the Union of India (Ministry of Environment). The petitioner's senior counsel sought permission to withdraw the application, which was granted. The Court noted that a two-judge High Court bench had already decided the matter but disagreed, with the case referred to a third judge. The Court disposed of I.A. No. 3 as withdrawn, allowing all points to be raised before the third judge for reconsideration in accordance with law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts