Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, legal heirs of Krishna Vithoba Xete Tilve, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Bombay at Goa challenging two orders: (1) the judgment dated 19.06.2008 passed by the Deputy Collector, Panaji, in Case Nos. MND/DYCL/APPL/7/2007 and MUND/DYCL/MISC/6/2007, and (2) the judgment dated 22.02.2010 passed by the Administrative Tribunal in Mundkar Revision Application No. 26/2008 and Misc. 150/08/STAY/MRA. The respondents, Vassudev Pandurang Naik and Vassanti Vassudev Naik, had been declared as Mundkars in respect of a dwelling house situated in property surveyed under chalta no. 48 of P.T. Sheet no. 109. The petitioners contended that the respondents had already been registered/declared as Mundkars in respect of a different dwelling house (chalta no. 54) by an order dated 19.11.1984, and therefore could not claim Mundkar status in respect of the disputed house. They further argued that the disputed portion was part of a larger house permitted to be occupied by the mother of the respondents for services rendered to the petitioners' predecessor in title. The respondents opposed the petition, supporting the concurrent findings. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the Deputy Collector and the Administrative Tribunal had recorded concurrent findings of fact on the issue of Mundkar status. The court found no perversity or lack of evidence in those findings. Relying on the settled principle that the High Court under Article 226 does not sit as an appellate court over concurrent findings of fact, the court dismissed the writ petition. The court observed that the petitioners failed to demonstrate any error of law or jurisdiction warranting interference. The decision was rendered on 7th July 2014 by Justice F. M. Reis.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 - Interference with Concurrent Findings of Fact - The High Court declined to interfere with concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Deputy Collector and the Administrative Tribunal regarding the status of respondents as Mundkars under the Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975 - Held that such findings are not amenable to interference under Article 226 unless perverse or based on no evidence (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court under Article 226 should interfere with concurrent findings of fact by the Deputy Collector and Administrative Tribunal declaring the respondents as Mundkars in respect of a dwelling house.
Final Decision
Writ Petition dismissed. The impugned judgments of the Deputy Collector and Administrative Tribunal are upheld.
Law Points
- Mundkar rights
- concurrent findings of fact
- writ jurisdiction
- Article 226
- Goa
- Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act
- 1975
