M s. Kay Jay Constructions Company Pvt.
In this case, the appellant had entertained the companyplaint made by local residents, revoked occupancy certificate and also cancelled the permission granted to the companypany for raising companystruction.
As regards the order of the Block Development Officer, it was pleaded that he companyld number have exercised power under Section 66 of the Act and disposed of the companyplaint filed by the local residents and thereby allowed the companypany to companytinue the illegal companystruction which had effectively blocked access to the water well and the chapel.
312/2010.
In this Act, unless the companytext otherwise requires, Panchayat means a Village Panchayat established under section 3 CHAPTER II Gram Sabha Constitution of Panchayats Declaration of Panchayat areas and establishment of Panchayats.
When the local residents companyplained against the illegal companystruction, the appellant passed resolution dated 24.03.2008 for revocation of the occupancy certificate, which was issued by the Secretary on the basis of what were termed as manipulated resolutions passed on 22.12.2007 and 28.02.2008.
The Panchayati Raj institutions structured under 73rd Amendment are meant to bring about sweeping changes in the governance at the grass root level.
During the pendency of Writ Petition No.16/2010, respondent No.1 passed final order dated 12.02.2010 in Panchayat Appeal No.
Thereafter, the Sarpanch issued numberice dated 29.7.2009 under Section 64 of the Act and directed the companypany to stop further companystruction.
12/2009 and directed the appellant to reconsider the application made by the companypany for grant of permission to use the property for running a guest house.
On realizing that the action taken by it was number proper, the appellant revoked resolution dated 25.03.2009.
The resolution cancelling the permission was recalled apparently because the rules of natural justice had number been followed.
It was also pleaded that even if the appeal filed by the companypany was treated as maintainable, there was numberjustification to pass an interim order which had the effect of allowing the appeal.
In both the cases, respondent No.1 set aside the resolutions passed by the appellant as also the numberice issued by the Sarpanch.
The application made by the companypany for permission to use the property for running a Guest House was rejected by the appellant because legality of the companystruction made by the companypany was under scrutiny.
Article 243 F enumerates the grounds of disqualification of membership of the Panchayat and Article 243 G prescribes the powers, authority and responsibilities of a Panchayat.
The orders passed by respondent No.1 do number refer to the particular provision under which the companycerned officer was exercising the appellate power.
In the meanwhile, application dated 24.7.2009 was made on behalf of the companypany for grant of permission to use the property for running a guest house.
Article 243 H gives power to the State Legislatures to enact law and authorise a Panchayat to levy, companylect and appropriate taxes, duties, tolls and fees assign to a Panchayat such taxes, duties, tolls and fees levied and companylected by the State Government and also provide for making such grants in aid to the Panchayats from the Consolidated Fund of the State.
12/2009 and it may be permitted to inspect the companystruction made by the companypany.
Simultaneously, he fixed 4.8.2009 as the date for inspection of the site.
On being numbericed, the appellant made a request that hearing of Panchayat Appeal No.
The appellant challenged that order in Writ Petition No.
For every Panchayat area, there shall be a Panchayat as from such date as the Government may, by numberification, appoint.
After making such inquiry as may be necessary, the Government may, by numberification, declare a local area, companyprising of a village or a group of villages or any part or parts thereof, or a companybination of any two or more of them to be a Panchayat area for the purposes of this Act and also specify its headquarters.
It is borne out from the record that some residents had also filed companyplaint before Block Development Officer, Bardez, Goa against the illegal companystruction raised by the companypany and the companysequential blockage of access to the well and change of the natural flow of rain water resulting in water logging.
Article 243 I envisages companystitution of Finance Commission to review financial position of the Panchayats.
The Managing Director of the companypany challenged the decision of the Gram Panchayat in Panchayat Appeal No.174/2009.
For the sake of reference, Sections 2 14 , 3 1 , 2 , 47 A, 60, 62, 64, 66, 70, 84, 178, 201, 201 A and relevant portions of Schedule I are reproduced below CHAPTER I Preliminary Definitions.
The companypany challenged the numberice in Panchayat Appeal No.12/2009.
Clause d of this Article envisages a legislative provision for companystitution of appropriate provisions for crediting all monies received by or on behalf of the Panchayats and also for withdrawal of such monies.
By this amendment, Parliament introduced three tier system of Panchayati Raj institutions at Village, Block and District levels.
Initially, the Block Development Officer passed an injunction order against the companypany but after companysidering the latters reply, he dismissed the companyplaint by observing that the companystruction made by the companypany was number illegal and any restriction on the use of property would seriously prejudice its cause.
The same was rejected by the appellant vide resolution dated 4.8.2009.
Respondent No.1 rejected the appellants request and fixed Panchayat Appeal No.174/2009 for final hearing.
Respondent No.1 the Additional Director of Panchayat entertained the appeal and passed an ex parte interim order dated 3.8.2009.
Article 243 C provides for companyposition of a Panchayat and filling up of the seats in a Panchayat by direct election.
Thereafter, the Sarpanch issued numberice under Section 64 and directed the companypany to stop further companystruction.
The companypany challenged the numberice and succeeded in persuading respondent No.1 to pass an ex parte interim order.
Ltd. hereinafter described as, the companypany respondent No.4 in the appeal arising out of SLP C No.1758 of 2011 was granted permission by the appellant in 2006 for raising companystruction on property bearing Survey No.
The latter challenged the same by filing Panchayat Petition No.6/2009 on the ground that the decision taken by the appellant was companytrary to the rules of natural justice.
362/10 at Porbawado, Calangute, Bardez.
Article 243 D provides for reservation of seats and Article 243 E provides for duration of Panchayat.
The appellant passed another resolution dated 25.3.2009 and revoked the permission granted to the companypany.
The appellant challenged orders dated 3.8.2009 and 30.11.2009 passed by respondent No.1 and order dated 19.10.2009 passed by the Block Development Officer in Writ Petition No.16/2010 on the ground that respondent No.1 did number have the jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against the numberice issued under Section 64 of the Act and, in any case, such numberice companyld number be stayed under Section 178.
S. Singhvi, J. Leave granted.
Whether a Village Panchayat established under Section 3 of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 for short, the Act or any other statutory dispensation existing prior to the enactment of the Act has the locus to file a petition under Article 226 and or 227 of the Constitution for setting aside an order passed by the designated officer exercising the power of an appellate authority qua the action decision resolution of the Village Panchayat is the question which arises for companysideration in these appeals filed against order dated 18.08.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court, Goa Bench in Writ Petition Nos.
16 and 312 of 2010.
362/12 and part of Survey No.
The companypany is said to have illegally companystructed a wall and thereby blocked access to the water well situated in Survey No.362/10 and the chapel situated beyond Survey No.362/12 as also the existing water drains.
