Allowed

Krishnakanth B. Mhaloji., v. Village Panchayat of Arpora Nagoa, Thr. Its Secretary and 5 Ors.

Bombay HC26 Feb 2019WP/85/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition seeking mandatory action for demolition of illegal structures, the High Court observed that an order dated 19.02.2019 by the Deputy Collector sufficiently addressed the petitioners' prayer. The court made the rule absolute and directed relevant authorities to demolish the illegal construction. |

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondents Nos. 4 and 5 to demolish the illegal construction in question as expeditiously as possible and in any case on or before 26th April, 2019.

Krishnakanth B. Mhaloji., Vs Village Panchayat of Arpora… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1 WP85-19 dt. 26-02-2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶3

 WRIT PETITION NO.85 OF 2019

¶4

Shri Krishnakanth B. Mhaloji,
50 years of age,
married, businessman,
Indian National,
Resident of Flat No.401,
M. N. Resort, Gorbhat Vaddo,
Arpora, Bardez Goa. …Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

1.Village Panchayat of Arpora- Nagoa, Through its Secretary having office at Arpora-Nagoa, Bardez Goa.

¶7

2.State of Goa, Through Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Alto-Porvorim, Bardez Goa.

¶8

3.The Deputy Collector, Mapusa, Bardez Goa.

¶9

4.The Block Development Officer, Mapusa, Bardez Goa.

¶10

5.Shri David Fernandes, Resident of Diwan Bhatti, Arpora, Bardez Goa.

¶11

2 WP85-19 dt. 26-02-2019

¶12

6.Shri Dominic Fernandes,
Resident of Diwan Bhatti,
…
Arpora, Bardez Goa. Respondents

¶13

Mr. Sayed Sufiyan, Advocate for the Petitioner.

¶14

Mr. P. Sawant, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

¶15

Mr. V. Sardessai, Additional Government Advocate for Respondent
Nos.2, 3 and 4.

¶16

Coram : M. S. Sonak & Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ.

¶17

Date : 26^th February, 2019

¶18

Oral Judgment ( Per M. S. Sonak, J)

¶19

Heard Mr. S. Sufiyan, learned counsel for the Petitioner,
Mr. V. Sardessai, learned Addl. Government Advocate for Respondent
Nos.2, 3, and 4 and Mr. P. Sawant, learned counsel for Respondent
No.1.

¶20

2. Rule. With the consent and at the request of the learned
counsel for the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

¶21

3.The learned counsel appearing for the respective
Respondents waive service on Rule.

¶22

3 WP85-19 dt. 26-02-2019

¶23

4. The main relief prayed for in this petition reads thus :

¶24

“This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or a writ, order or direction thereby directing the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 to implement the Demolition Order dated 13/6/2018 and demolish the illegal construction of the Respondent Nos.5 and 6 in the property bearing survey No.129/10, 129/18 and 129/20 of Arpora Village.”

¶25

5. Mr. V. Sardessai, learned Addl. Government Advocate
appearing for Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 places on record the order
dated 19th February, 2019 made by the Deputy Collector and S.D.M.
and Incharge of Demolition Squad, North Goa District at Panaji Goa,
which reads thus :

¶26

No. DEMO-SQUAD/95/2018 Dated : 19/02/2019

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

Whereas, the Block Development Officer-I&II, Bardez,
Mapusa Goa, vide letter No.3-EOVP-II/BDO-BAR/Dem-Req/2018-
19/5686 dated 4/9/2018 requested to provide the demolition squad
and police protection for the demolition of illegal construction of
shed built/erected in survey No.129/10, 18, 20 at Ghorbhatwaddo,
Arpora, Bardez Goa, carried out by David Fernandes and Domnic
Fernandes, Diwanbhatti, Arpora, Bardez Goa.

¶29

Now therefore, I, Shri Shashank Mani Tripathi, IAS, Sub

¶30

4 WP85-19 dt. 26-02-2019

¶31

Divisional Magistrate/Incharge of the Demolition Squad, North Goa
District, Panaji Goa hereby grant the demolition squad to Block
Development Officer I & II, Bardez, Mapusa, Goa on 26/04/2019
and request the following authorities/agencies as under :

¶32

1.The Superintendent of Police, North Goa District, Porvorim,
Bardez Goa : to depute 15 police personnel, including the 05 lady
police personnel headed by P.I./P.S.I. on the above schedule date at
9.00 a.m.

¶33

2. The Dy. Collector & S. D. M., Bardez Taluka, Mapusa : to depute
Executive Magistrate/Mamlatdar on the date mentioned above to
effectively carry out the demolition and also to take care of law and
order problems on the above mentioned date.

¶34

3. The Executive Engineer, Work Division-XIII, P.W.D., Mapusa
Goa : to provide the demolition team of 12 labourers, along with
other necessary tools and equipment to demolish/remove of above
mentioned illegal construction etc., on the above schedule date at
9.00 a.m.

¶35

4.The Executive Engineer, DIV-VI/concerned Division, Electricity Dept., Mapusa- Goa : to depute electrical personnel in order to disconnect the electric supply if any at the above mentioned site.

¶36

5. The Block Development Officer -I&II, Bardez, Mapusa Goa : shall be responsible for proper identification of said illegal construction mentioned above as per his aforesaid request. He is also personally responsible to monitor the demolition work and get the work done effectively completed as per his aforesaid requisition and send the compliance report of the demolition to this authority after execution of this order within two days of execution.

¶37

5 WP85-19 dt. 26-02-2019

¶38

6. The Block Development Officer I&II, Bardez, Mapusa Goa is also
responsible for service of the present order to Authority/Agency at Sr.
No.2 to 6 mentioned below in this order and submit compliance
report of the same before date of demolition. If the said work is
postponed due to non presence or non compliance of the present
order and if any consequences caused then upon due to postponement
of work of demolition then concerned officer will be solely held
responsible for it.

¶39

All the Officers/Officials are instructed to report to Block
Development Officer I & II, Bardez, Mapusa, Goa on the scheduled
date & time. The Mamlatdar/Joint Mamlatdar will then co-ordinate
the work of demolition and carry out the work expeditiously. The
instruction given in Circular No.4-36-96-DEM-SQUAD/RB dated
2/12/2009 by the Collector of North Goa District, Panaji shall be
strictly followed.

¶40

 Sd/-

¶41

6. Upon our query as to why the date of demolition is fixed
as 26th April, 2019, Mr. Sardessai states that there is possibility of
code of conduct coming into force. According to us, there can be no
difficulty in executing the demolition orders which have been attained
finality merely because the code of conduct is to set in. In any case, if
the apprehension is that the code of conduct will shortly set in, then,
the date of demolition should have been preponed and not postponed

¶42

6 WP85-19 dt. 26-02-2019

¶43

as has been done in the present case.

¶44

7. Mr. Sardessai, learned Addl. Government Advocate
however makes a statement that the demolition order will be executed
as expeditiously as possible and the date 26th April, 2019 is only the
outer time limit. He states that in this matter no extension of time will
be applied for to carry out the demolition. All these statements are
accepted as the statements made to this Court. According to us, the
aforesaid order dated 19th February, 2019 substantially works out the
main relief applied for by the Petitioner in the present petition.

¶45

8. Accordingly, the rule is made absolute in the aforesaid
terms and the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are directed to demolish the
illegal construction in question, in terms of their own order dated
19th February, 2019 as expeditiously as possible and in any case on or
before 26th April, 2019.

¶46

9. All concerned to act on the basis of the authenticated copy
of this order.

¶47

Prithviraj K. Chavan, J. M. S. Sonak, J.

¶48

at*

Krishnakanth B. Mhaloji., v. Village Panchayat of Arpora Nagoa, Thr. Its Secretary and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnakanth B. Mhaloji., v. Village Panchayat of Arpora Nagoa, Thr. Its Secretary and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maya Carvalho E Rodrigues., Vs State of Goa, through Its Chief Secretary and 5 Ors.

Ryan Fernandes, Presently Serving Sentence at Central Jail, Colvale., Vs the Office of Superintendent, Central Jail Colvale and 2 Ors.

Kamlakant Gopinath Phadte, Presently Serving Sentence at Modern Central Jail, Colvale., Vs the Office of Superintendent, Central Jail Colvale and Anr.

Ujjaini Prabhu Dessai., Vs the Curchorem Cacora Municipal Council, Rep. Thr. Its Chief Officer and 2 Ors.

William Gonsalves., Vs S. v. Naik and 2 Ors.

Prasad Enterprises, Thr. Prop., Kiran Shirsat., Vs State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary and Anr.