← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/385/2019rule made absolute

Peter Martins., v. State Of Goa, Thr. The Chief Secretary And ANR.,

2019-04-25Hon'Ble Shri Justice R. D. Dhanuka,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prithviraj K. Chavan3 pages

1 Writ Petition No. 385/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 385/2019 Peter Martins, s/o Aniceto Martins, Indian National, aged 51 years, r/o H.No.888/6, Alto Porvorim, Near Holy Family School, Socorro Bardez, Goa. ... Petitioner. Vs.

1. State of Goa through the Chief Secretary, having office at Secretariat, Porvorim, Goa.

2.

The Directorate of Panchayats, Through its Director, rd Floor, Junta House, Panaji, Goa. ... Respondents Mr Shivan Desai, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Dattaprasad Lawande, Advocate General with Mr. Pravin N. Faldessai, Addl. Government Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 2. Coram : R. D. Dhanuka & Prithviraj K. Chavan,JJ.

Date : 25th April 2019.

2 Writ Petition No. 385/2019 Oral Judgment (R. D. Dhanuka, J) Rule.

2. Learned Advocate General waives service on behalf of the respondents.

3. By consent of parties, petition is heard finally.

4. This petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order dated 25.02.2019 passed by the Director of Panchayats, withdrawing the permission issued to the Village Panchayat Secretary to contest the Election of the Elective post of Managing Committee Attorney of Commuidade Serula, Porvorim Bardez, Goa for the year 2019 to 2023 and for immediate next term of 3 years.

5. Learned Advocate General states that the impugned order dated 25.02.2019 stands withdrawn. Statement is accepted. In view of the statement made by the learned Advocate General, nothing survives in this petition and the same is disposed of accordingly.

3 Writ Petition No. 385/2019

6. It is made clear that in the event, the learned Director of Panchayat proposes to pass any fresh order, the same shall be passed after following due process of law.

7. Rule is made absolute on the aforesaid terms.

8. If any fresh action is proposed by respondent no. 2, the contentions of both parties are kept open.

PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. R. D. DHANUKA, J.