JUDGMENT - R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J.:---This petition relates to the provisions contained in Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975, hereinafter called as "the said Act". The point which arises for consideration is:-

"Whether the decision of a Mamlatdar under section 32(2) of the said Act on an issue being referred to it under section 32(1) of the said Act is subject to an appeal under section 24 of the said Act or not? What is the scope and the extent of exclusion of jurisdiction of Civil Courts under section 32 r/w 31(2) of the said Act?"

2. The respondents herein filed a suit bearing No. 242/79/B in the Civil Court for eviction of the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners were the licensees in the house bearing No. 79 situated at Fondvem, Ribandar, Goa, hereinafter called as "the suit house", and that their licence had been terminated and, therefore, they were trespassers in the suit house and hence, were liable to be evicted. The petitioners contested the suit inter alia claiming to be mundkars in respect of the suit house. Consequently, the civil Court by its Order dated 1st October, 1982 framed necessary issue regarding the plea of Mundkarship by the petitioners and thereafter, by its order dated 28th June, 1983 referred the said issue to the Mamlatdar of Tiswadi in terms of provisions contained in section 32(1) of the said Act for necessary decision of the Mamlatdar on the said issue. The Mamlatdar by its order dated 31st July, 1992 answered the reference in negative thereby holding that the petitioners are not the mundkars in respect of the suit house. Against the said decision, the petitioners preferred the appeal under section 24 of the said Act which was allowed by the Deputy Collector who is the Appellate Authority under the said Act. The appeal was allowed by judgment and Order dated 18th March, 1996. The same was subjected to the revision application by the respondent before the administration tribunal under section 25(1) of the said Act. The Administrative Tribunal while interpreting section 32(2) of the Act, relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of (Noor Mohd. Khan Ghouse Khan Saudagar v. Fakirappa Bharmappa Machenahalli and others)1, reported in A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 1217 held that the said Act does not provide for any right of appeal to the Appellate Authority under the said Act against the decision of the Mamlatdar given in the reference under section 32(2) of the said Act. In the challenge to the said decision of the Administrative Tribunal the above quoted questions are sought to be raised for determination in this petition.

3. Though, the point decided by the tribunal relates only to the right of appeal against a decision of the Mamlatdar in the reference under section 32 of the Act, it is intimately connected with the point regarding the scope of the exclusion of the jurisdiction of the Civil Court under section 31(2) of the said Act.

4. With the intention to provide for better protection to the mundkars against eviction form the dwelling houses and to grant them right to purchase such houses along with the land appurtenant thereto at a reasonable price and to abolish the system of free service which was being rendered by the mundkars to their bhatkars and to make certain other provisions connected therewith, the said Act was enacted and it came into force from 12th March, 1976 which is called as "the appointed day" under the said Act.

5. The said Act is divided into four chapters, the first one comprises of provisions regarding its extents, date of enforcement of the said Act and regarding the definition of the terms and expressions used in the said Act. The second chapter deals with rights and liabilities of the mundkars and bhatkars under the said Act. The third chapter is in relation to power and functions of various authorities under the said Act and provisions regarding appeals, revision applications and the maintenance of register of mundkars. The last

Click Here to Read the rest of this document