PANJIM: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday granted interim-stay to the disqualification of Anjuna-Caisua sarpanch Laxmidas Chimulkar and panchayat member Sheetal Naik.
The apex court accordingly restored the positions and further stayed the proceedings before the Bardez Block Development Officer (BDO) Prathamesh Shankardas, who was given 15 days by the High Court to decide as regard to disqualification proceedings.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta granted interim relief while hearing a special leave petition filed by Chimulkar and Naik against the High Court of Bombay at Goa order which had directed that the two panchayat members would stand deemed to be disqualified under Section 12 (1) (d) of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.
The High Court while hearing suo motu petition on illegal constructions on August 23, had held that prima facie seats held by Chimulkar and Sheetal Naik have deemed to be or to have come vacant. The Court had restrained Chimulkar from functioning as member or sarpanch and the deputy sarpanch was asked to exercise and perform the duties of the sarpanch until a new sarpanch was duly elected.
Amicus curie Adv Abhijit Gosavi had complained that panchayat member Sheetal Naik had also put up illegal and unauthorised structure and that the duo participated in the panchayat meeting where they had pecuniary interest.
Naik had proposed that the show cause notice issued by the village panchayat be discharged.
Earlier, the High Court had directed the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) and the village panchayat secretary to conduct an inspection, which found as many as 275 illegal structures at the Anjuna beach.
Subsequently, the panchayat held meetings where owners were asked to produce documents related to these structures which were mostly used for commercial activities. Following allegations of illegal constructions made against the petitioners, the High Court instructed them to submit a preliminary affidavit about their interests in these structures.
The Court ultimately riled that the petitioners were deemed to be disqualified under Section 12 (1) (d) of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1991 based on the minutes of the meetings provided by the panchayat secretary suggesting their involvement in meetings with personal interests.
Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred special leave petition before the Supreme Court. Representing both the petitioners, Senior Advocate Atmaram N S Nadkarni argued that the High Court disqualified them hastily without granting them an opportunity to respond thus violating the principles of natural justice. They pointed out that a notice was served on August 22 and that the disqualification order was issued the following day.
Adv Nadkarni questioned the decision of HC directing the BDO to give a final decision within 15 days.
Meanwhile, the suo motu petition will come up for hearing before the High Court on Monday, September 11.
