PRAKASH MUKUND MURARI, S/O LATE MUKUND MURARI Vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT-II, DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule made returnable forthwith. The learned Counsel for the respondent no. 2 and the learned Counsel for the respondent nos. 3 and 4, waive service. Heard finally by consent of parties.

(2.) By this petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 07.10.2016, passed by the learned District Judge, Panaji in Civil Revision Application No. 96/2015. By the impugned order, the learned District Judge has affirmed the order of remand dated 07.10.2015, passed by the learned Additional Director of Panchayat, Panaji.

(3.) The petitioner had lodged a complaint with the respondent no. 2-Village Panchayat of Tuem about certain alleged illegal construction under taken by the respondent no. 3, obstructing the access of the petitioner. It was also contended that the construction was without any licence. The Village Panchayat failed to take any action. Hence, the petitioner approached the learned Deputy Director of Panchayat, who assumed powers under Section 66(5) of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. It appears that the Deputy Director of Panchayat caused the spot inspection of the site conducted through the Block Development Officer, Pernem (BDO), who submitted his report on 04.08.2009, confirming that the respondent no. 3 had carried out illegal construction in the property situated at village Tuem.