HC directs Neura panchayat to demolish illegal constructions within two months

PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa on Wednesday directed the Neura village panchayat to demolish the illegal constructions within next two months and to recover the cost of demolition from the wrongdoer John Gonsalves.

The Court has also asked the panchayat to file a compliance report with photographs with the Director of Panchayats within three months after giving a copy of the same to the petitioner Milagrina D’Mello.

Further, the village panchayat has been directed to investigate the respondent’s complaints against the toilet built by the petitioner and dispose the complaints within next two months after complying with the principles of natural justice and fair play.

The petitioner, between May and August 2016, had filed complaints inter alia to the health authorities and the village panchayat alleging that the respondent John Gonsalves had unauthorisedly covered a well and constructed a toilet, septic tank and soak pit on the common well without obtaining any permissions from any authorities. 

By an order dated September 8, 2021, the Deputy Director directed the Neura village panchayat to demolish the illegal constructions carried out by Gonsalves, within one month from receipt of the order.

Gonsalves challenged the Deputy Director’s order before the Additional Director of Panchayats, who by a judgment and order dated December 23, 2021 dismissed the appeal and confirmed the Deputy Director’s order. 

Aggrieved by the order, Gonsalves filed a revision application under Section 201-B of the Panchayat Raj Act, before the North Goa District Court, Panjim, who by the impugned judgment and order dated June 21, 2022, allowed the  revision application and set aside the orders of the Deputy Director and the Additional Director of Panchayats, on  grounds that the petitioner’s original complaint to the village panchayat was barred by limitation under the  residuary Article 137 of the Schedule of the Limitation Act and that the powers of the panchayat to act against illegal constructions could be exercised only where the illegal construction was going on but not after the wrongdoer completed the illegal construction.

High Court Judge Justice Mahesh Sonak said that the revisional authority, passing the impugned order, completely lost sight of the fact that the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 and the provisions in Article 137 in the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963, applied only to the Courts and not to the panchayat acting under the Section 66 of the Panchayat Raj Act. The Court set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the North Goa Ad-hoc District Judge and restored and confirmed the orders passed by the Deputy Director of Panchayats and the Additional Director of Panchayats.