MAPUSA
The Mapusa Municipal Council’s (MMC) upcoming proposal to discuss the renewal of shop leases in the municipal market has sparked discontent among several councillors.
Scheduled for review at the council meeting on October 30, the proposal includes renewing leases for shops, stalls, and kiosks, alongside a dozen cases of lease transfers”an agenda that some councillors allege favours specific owners and carries financial motivations.
Around 60 files for lease renewal and another dozen for transfer are expected to be presented during the meeting.
However, State government guidelines specify that leases of municipal properties can only be renewed according to terms and rates published in an official gazette notification.
With no such notification currently in place, the MMC’s decision to table these renewals and transfers has raised suspicions.
Discontented councillors pointed out that a similar lease renewal proposal was discussed last year, only to be deferred after concerns were raised over the council’s lack of authority in such matters.
Additionally, the government has mandated that lease transfers within family relations require proof of succession or an inventory document.
This stipulation has reportedly stalled many pending lease renewals, adding to tenant frustration.
One shop owner, who wished to remain anonymous, expressed concerns over the lengthy delays in lease renewals.
“We are required to renew the leases by law, but the process has been pending for a long time, possibly due to ulterior motives,” the shop owner stated.
Meanwhile, Councillor Shashank Narvekar revealed that notices had been issued to some shops for sub-leasing their properties, a practice contrary to the lease terms.
“The lease renewal should be addressed case-by-case. Shops that are owner-operated and not sub-let should not face obstacles,” Narvekar stated.
However, he emphasised that even if the council approves the renewal proposal, final ratification must come from the Director of Municipal Administration.
As the council meeting approaches, the debate underscores ongoing issues surrounding transparency and governance in municipal property management, while market tenants remain uncertain about the future of their leases.
