Team Herald
PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa on Friday disqualified former Loutolim sarpanch and current panchayat member Inacio Fernandes.
However, the respondent’s counsel prayed that the judgment and order be stayed for a period of four weeks while, it was opposed by the counsel appearing for the petitioner and the village panchayat.
Considering the fact that Fernandes had been a member and sarpanch since 2017, the court kept the order in abeyance for a period of two weeks only.
Hearing two writ petitions filed by Franky Monteiro, a resident of Devote-Loutolim, the court disqualified Fernandes under Section 10 (f) of Goa Panchayat Raj Act for being in contract between him and the village panchayat, thereby showing that he had a direct monetary interest in such a contract.
Monteiro in his petition had prayed that Fernandes be disqualified as panchayat member under Section 10 (d) of Goa Panchayat Raj Act, for being in arrears of rent concerning two shops, which he had taken on lease from the village panchayat and also under Section 10 (f) of the Act.
Earlier, on November 19, 2018, the Goa State Election Commission (GSEC) had disqualified Fernandes under Section 10 (d) of the Act and held that he could not be disqualified under Section 10 (f) of the said Act.
But aggrieved by the decision, both Fernandes and Monteiro filed civil revision applications before the District Court, Margao. Fernandes appealed against the GSEC order before the District Court, while Monteiro also challenged the GSEC verdict not disqualifying Fernandes under Section 10 (f) of the Act, claiming that it was erroneous.
On August 31, 2019, the District Court in civil revision application set aside the order of the GSEC disqualifying Fernandes under Section 10 (d) of the Act.
Dismissing the second writ petition, the Court found that the approach adopted by the District Court, while reversing the finding of the GSEC in the context of Section 10 (d) of the said Act, was fully justified. This court held that Fernandes was well within his rights to raise such a dispute and it could not be said that he had incurred disqualification for being in arrears of rent, because he had not deposited the increased rent as claimed by the village panchayat.
