MAPUSA
The Mapusa Municipal Council has once again found itself mired in controversy after it emerged that six contractual staff members “ whose one-year terms ended in September “ continue to receive salaries despite the council not renewing their contracts.
Four Lower Division Clerks and two Junior Stenographers were recruited under questionable circumstances last year. Their contracts expired, no renewal was passed, and yet the staff continue to draw salaries “ an act the opposition councillors have denounced as a blatant and deliberate violation of municipal rules.
Opposition councillors Tarak Arolkar and Shashank Narvekar tore into the ruling council for what they termed “illegal payments” made in defiance of procedure and without the approval of the council.
Arolkar had even filed a written appeal urging the municipality to halt salaries until the contracts were renewed through proper channels.
He had also lodged a complaint against one of the staffers for misconduct while on duty some months ago.
Instead of addressing the concerns, Chief Officer Chandrakant Shetkar reportedly reacted with irritation and defended the decision, arguing that “similar practices had been followed in the past” “ a justification the opposition rejected as appalling and unacceptable.
“This is a serious violation. Two wrongs cannot make a right, and in this case it is completely illegal,” Narvekar told The Goan, demanding that the CO immediately reverse the irregularity.
Arolkar, too, slammed both the CO and Chairperson Priya Mishal for allowing the illegality to persist.
What particularly enraged the opposition councillors was the Chief Officer’s conduct “ walking out of the council meeting in the middle of the discussion, in complete disregard for the chairperson and the sanctity of the meeting.
Instead of asserting authority, Chairperson Mishal cited lack of quorum and abruptly wound up the meeting, leaving the issue unresolved and the irregular payments continuing unchecked.
The episode once again exposes the ruling council’s growing disregard for due process and administrative norms and raises troubling questions about the CO’s unilateral behaviour and the chairperson’s unwillingness “ or inability “ to rein in violations festering under her watch.
