the goan I network
PANAJI
The Bombay High Court at Goa has unseated Arambol panch Deepika Vaigankar, ruling that Vaigankar, in taking part in a panchayat discussion concerning her own house had violated provisions of the Goa Panchayati Raj Act earning her a disqualification as a panchayat member.
Petitioner Uday Vaigankar, told the court that Deepika Vaingankar attended the meeting of the Panchayat held on 28 June, 2017 and has voted in favour of a resolution, in which it was unanimously resolved to regularize H No 299 in the property bearing Sy No 176/9 and 176/10 of VP Arambol within the period of two months. The resolution was duly passed in the meeting held on 28 June, 2017.
Uday, in his petition told the court that the house in question which was resolved to be unanimously regularised by all the members of the Panchayat, is the ancestral house of panch member Deepika, which stands recorded in the name of Krishna Hari Vaigankar, who is none other than her father-in-law.
Section 55 (4) of the Panchayati Raj Act
provides that no member of a Panchayat shall vote on, or take part in the discussion of, any question coming up for consideration at a meeting of a Panchayat, if the question is one in which, apart from its general application to the public, he has any pecuniary interest, and if the person presiding has such an interest, he shall not preside over the meeting when such question comes up for consideration.
Further, Under 12(1)(d) of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (said Act) provides that if a member of a Panchayat votes or takes part in discussion in contravention of the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 55, his seat shall be deemed to be or to have become, as the case may be, vacant.
The panch member however argued that she no longer resides along with her husband in House No. 300(2) and has no nexus whatsoever with House No. 299 and further that since she was not married under the Regime of Communion of Assets and, therefore, can be said to have no right, title or interest whatsoever to House No. 299.
The High Court, after examining evidence, however noted that “the evidence on record has overwhelmingly established that House No 299 is the ancestral house, recorded in the name of her father-in-law Krishna Hari Vaigankar.
“The record also establishes that [she] has also lived in that house soon after her marriage. Merely stating that [she] now lives in the adjacent house, or some other house, does not mean that [she] had no pecuniary interest in House No 299. The record establishes that even the application for regularisation was made by her own brother-in-law,” the High Court noted.
The High Court also noted that the petitioner Uday Vaigankar had made complaints regards the illegal constructions in House No.299 and had pursued the matter to demolish the illegal constructions even before the Deputy Director of Panchayats, who made orders for demolition. The matter was, thereafter, taken up at the level of the Additional Director of Panchayats, as well.
However, soon after Deepika was elected as a panch in the very first meeting of the Panchayat held on 28th June, 2017, the issue of regularization of the illegal construction was taken up and the proposal for regularization was unanimously approved by all the Members of Panchayat, including herself.
“In the circumstances, can be said to have voted in contravention of the provisions of Section 55(4) of the said Act and, therefore, her seat as the Member of the Panchayat, is deemed to be or to have become vacant. Her continuance as the Member of the Panchayat is, consequently, without any authority of law. We declare that [Deepika Vaigankar] is deemed to have vacated her seat as the Member of the Panchayat and direct that she shall no longer act as the Member of the Panchayat,” the High Court ruled.
