Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Tukaram K. Naik Kundaikar, owned a structure/gada on Borda road in Margao, Goa, where he had been selling kerosene since 1975 under a valid licence. In 1986, the Margao Municipal Council issued a notice for demolition alleging unauthorized extension. The petitioner filed a suit, and the Municipality agreed to withdraw the notice. Subsequently, a new licence was granted in 2006 for selling cigarettes, etc., valid until 31.03.2008. In 2008, the Chief Officer asked for a No Objection Certificate from the Fire Department, and upon unsatisfactory reply, ordered the petitioner to stop selling kerosene and remove extensions. The petitioner appealed under Section 184 of the Goa Municipalities Act, 1968 to the Administrative Tribunal, which returned the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. He then appealed to the Director of Municipal Administration, who dismissed it on 17.02.2009 as not maintainable. A subsequent appeal to the Administrative Tribunal was also rejected. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the Tribunal's order. The High Court considered whether the order of the Director of Urban Development was appealable. The Court noted that under Section 293 of the Act, an appeal lies only against an unlawful order of the Chief Officer. Since the Chief Officer's order was within his jurisdiction and not unlawful, no appeal was maintainable. The Court dismissed the petition, upholding the Tribunal's decision.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Appeal - Maintainability - Section 293 of Goa Municipalities Act, 1968 - The short point was whether an order dated 17.02.2009 passed by the Director of Urban Development is appealable before the Administrative Tribunal. The Court held that the order of the Chief Officer directing removal of encroachment was not unlawful and hence no appeal lay under Section 293. The Administrative Tribunal correctly dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an order dated 17.02.2009 passed by the Director of Urban Development is appealable before the Administrative Tribunal in Municipal Appeal no. 1 of 2009.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the order of the Chief Officer was not unlawful and therefore no appeal lay under Section 293 of the Goa Municipalities Act, 1968. The Administrative Tribunal correctly dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.
Law Points
- Appeal lies only against unlawful orders of Chief Officer under Section 293 of Goa Municipalities Act
- 1968
- Order directing removal of encroachment is not unlawful if within jurisdiction
- Administrative Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain appeal against order of Director of Urban Development
