SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Bom) 1047

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (GOA BENCH)
VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.
Mrs. Martina Fernandes and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Rajanikant Vijaynath Keni Robollow (deceased), Maya Keni Robollo and Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 119 of 2021
Decided on : 11-01-2024

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Joseph Vaz along with Mr. Terrance Anthony Vaz, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. Shivan Dessai along with Mr. A. V. Pavithran and Mr. P. Kholkar, Advocates

Illegal constructions cannot be regularized without proper permissions, and claims of natural justice violations are unfounded if structures are deemed illegal.

Headnote:(A) Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 - Section 66 - Demolition of illegal structures - Petition challenging the demolition order of Panchayat upheld by District Court - Petitioners claimed structures existed since 1987 but failed to provide evidence of legality - Court emphasized that illegal constructions cannot be regularized without proper permissions. (Paras 3, 11, 12, 15)

(B) Natural Justice - Petitioners argued violation of principles of natural justice due to lack of access to transgression report - Court found no merit as the structures were already deemed illegal. (Paras 3, 4, 15)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenged the demolition of five structures ordered by the Panchayat, claiming they were built legally and existed since the late 1980s. The District Court upheld the demolition order, stating the structures were illegal.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the District Court's decision, stating that the structures were illegal and could not be regularized without proper permissions.

Issues: The main issues were whether the structures were legal and if the Petitioners were denied natural justice.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that illegal constructions cannot be regularized and emphasized the need for proper permissions under the Goa Panchayat Raj Act.

Result: Petition dismissed with no order as to costs.

JUDGMENT :

Valmiki Sa Menezes, J. - Rule is made returnable forthwith, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties same is disposed of finally.

2. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to challenge Judgment dated 24/07/2020 passed by the District Court, South Goa, in Criminal Revision Application No. 23/2018, Judgment dated 12/03/2018 passed by the Additional Director of Panchayat in Appeal No. MAR-I/109/2013, MAR-I/111/2013, MAR- I/112/2013, MAR-I/113/2013, MAR-I/114/2013, and demolition order dated 02/08/2013 issued by the Village Panchayat of Ambaulim, Quepem, Goa.

By the order dated 02/08/2013 the Panchayat directed the demolition of 5 structures standing in the land bearing Survey No. 122/1 and 124/59 of village Ambaulim. These five structures are the subject matter of this Petition.

3. The facts that have led to the filing of this petition are stated herein under:

    (a) On a complaint made by Respondent No. 1 to the concerned Panchayat, the Panchayat exercised jurisdiction under Section 66 of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 ('The Act') and after issuance of a Show cause notice to 9 parties who were alleged to have constructed 9 structures in the above properties, after eliciting their reply proceeded to pass demolition orders dated 02/08/2013 holding all 9 structures to be illegal.

    (b) Against the order of demolition, the 5 Petitioners herein preferred 5 Appeals in terms of the provision of section 66(7) of the Act before the Director of Panchayats, who concluded that all 5 structures of the Petitioners were illegal; however, the Director of Panchayats has observed that these Petitioners may seek regularization only after the finalization of the title suit between them and Respondent No. 1/ complainant. In that view of the matter, the Director of Panchayat held that the final order of the demolition dated 02/08/2013 would be kept in abeyance and executed by the Panchayat only after finalization of the title suit pending before the Civil Court, such that it would enable the Petitioners to seek regularization of their structures.

    (c) From the records, it also transpires that the Petitioners filed a Special Civil Suit No. 16/2011/A before the Civil Judge Senior Division, 'A' Court at Quepem claiming title to the above properties from the year 1991, seeking a decree of declaration of their title and correction of the survey record which stood in the name of the complainant's ancestors. In this suit, there appears to be no pleadings of the existence, dimension or location of the structures held to be illegal and subject matter of the demolition order.

    (d) Note made also to be taken of the facts that in reply dated 07/07/2011 to the Show- cause notice issued by the Panchayat, the Petitioners took up a plea that they were Mundkars in respect of the structures in question and that the Petitioner No. 1, 3, 4 and 5 were allotted house numbers for their structures respectively in the year 1989, 1987, 1990 and 1996. They also claim in the reply that some of the structures were given Electricity connection between the period 1987 and 1997.

    (e) The Petitioners chose not to challenge the decision of the Director of Panchayat and accepted the findings of the Director of Panchayat, that the structures were illegal. However, the complainant preferred a Revision Application No. 23/2018, before the District Court, Margao, Goa, impugning that part of the order of the Director of Panchayat by which his demolition was stayed until the decision in the Civil Suit. The Revision Application was ultimately allowed by Judgment dated 24/07/2020, whereby the District Court has modified the order passed by the Director of Panchayat holding that the direction granting a stay of the operation of the demolition order until the decision in the Civil Suit, was dropped. Consequently, the District Court has upheld the order of the demolition and removed all conditions granting the stay of the demolition until the decision

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top