JUDGMENT - R.K. BATTA, J.:---The petitioner was allotted tenement M-45 in the Housing Board Colony on 22-7-1976. In front of the tenement of the petitioner, there is an open space admeasuring about 2,055 square meters. In this open space construction is sought to be made by respondent No. 1, which is subject-matter of challenge in this petition. The construction was started by respondent No. 1 after the open space was gifted by the Housing Board to the respondent No. 1. Some of the residents of the colony protested and the Deputy Town Planner also questioned the said development by his letter dated 14-10-1996. According to the petitioner, the construction is being carried out without obtaining any conversion sanad or obtaining any permission from the Authorities concerned and the construction in question, which is for the purpose of the community hall, is not permissible in terms of Regulation No. 20(3) of the Planning and Development Authority (Development Plan) Regulations, 1989. 2.The respondent No. 1 in the Affidavit-in-reply dated 28th October, 1996 has, in Para 7, stated that the development in question is being done under the scheme of Member of Parliament of North Goa and the construction of library-cum-community hall shall be utilized for the purposes of sports and social activities. It is further stated by respondent No. 1 that it was on the representation of the residents of the locality that the said construction covering an area of 264 square meters of the open space has been started after the proposal for development was scrutinised by the State Government as well as the Collector, P.W.D. and the other concerned Authorities. The scheme has been granted administrative approval by the Collector of Goa. It is further brought on record by respondent No. 1 that the Housing Board Colony spreads over an area of 2,00,000 square meters and the total open space reserved as per approved plan is 35,000 square meters and the construction in question is being restricted to an area of only 264 square meters. In further Affidavit dated 25th November, 1996, it was clarified by the respondent No. 1 that the said area of 264 square meters shall be utilised for the purpose of sports and cultural activities such as a library hall and garden pavilion for the benefit of the residents of the locality and the remaining portion of the said open space shall be developed as garden-cum-park. 3.We have heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1 and learned Government Advocate Shri Bharne for respondents Nos. 2 and 3. The total area which is developed by the Housing Board is 2,00,000 square meters and open space of 35,000 square meters has been left. In one of the open spaces, which admeasures 2,055 square meters, the construction in question is coming up under the scheme of Member of Parliament and the same has the approval of the Government. Initially about 18 residents of the locality had raised objection to the said development but 160 residents of the same locality had requested the development of the said open plot for the benefit of the residents of the locality. Regulation 28(c) of the Planning and Development Authority (Development Plan) Regulations, 1989 permits the development of open space for community purposes like playgrounds, parks or recreational spaces as also for installation of public utilities, street furniture, etc. Respondent No. 1 has submitted that the use of the said construction admeasuring 264 square meters shall be restricted to sports and cultural activities including library hall and garden which is permissible under the said Regulations. 4.Taking into consideration that only 264 square meters of the open space is being utilized as against the total open space of 35,000 square meters and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the development undertaken by respondent No. 1 cannot be stopped as sought by the petitioner. The development is for the benefit of the residents of the locality. Besides this, the learned Senior Counsel, after taking instructions from respondent No. 1 has stated that the Rural Development Agency has already sanctioned for making a garden in the said open space and the Panchayat shall set up a garden in the said open space left after the construction admeasuring 264 square meters by December, 2000. We accept the said statement. 5.In view of the above, we do not find any merit in this petition and the petition is hereby rejected. Rule is accordingly, discharged. In the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed. -----