The High Court of Bombay at Goa has disposed of a writ petition filed by Majorda-Utorda-Calata Sarpanch, Anthea Lynn Pereira, after the State assured that due procedure of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 would be followed before taking any adverse action against her regarding allegations of an inspection flaw.
The Division Bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Nivedita Mehta recorded the submission of Additional Government Advocate Sulekha Kamat, who said that the Panchayat Department has only ordered an inquiry.
“As far as the order dated July 30 is concerned, it only directs an inquiry to be conducted in the backdrop of the inspection report. If at all the findings are against the petitioner, the respondents shall follow the procedure of law, particularly Section 50 of the Act,” Kamat stated.
The petitioner had expressed apprehension that action would be taken immediately upon the receipt of the inquiry report, without giving her the statutory opportunity to show cause. Pereira also stated that such action, if taken, would violate Section 50(4) of the Act, which mandates an opportunity of hearing before a Sarpanch can be removed for alleged misuse of powers.
The Directorate of Panchayats had earlier, on July 30, directed a detailed inquiry into a complaint lodged by the Managing Director of KHR Hospitality India Ltd alleging that the Panchayat carried out a site inspection in violation of due procedure, and without involving the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority.
“Panchayat carried out the site Inspection which was not in accordance with the procedure and without referring to the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority which is the principal authority. This evidently made it clear that site inspection was malafide, motivated and for extraneous reasons to cause harassment to him (complainant),” the firm had stated.
The High Court observed that prima facie it appeared the Sarpanch had abused the powers vested in her under the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and directed the Additional Director of Panchayats (South) to submit a detailed inquiry report within 15 days.
“We have not pronounced upon the merits of the matter, and the contentions of the parties are kept open,” the court said while disposing of the petition.
