PRADEEP V.SALELKAR Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTER & SDO MARGAO & ANR.
LAWS(BOM)-2017-2-109
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AT: PANAJI)
Decided on February 06,2017

Pradeep V.Salelkar Appellant
VERSUS
Deputy Collecter And Sdo Margao And Anr. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

C.V. Bhadang, J. - (1.) Rule, made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel for the respective respondent waive service. Heard finally by consent of parties.
(2.) There was an order directing the respondent no.2 to demolish the subject structure which was admeasuring 66 sq.mtrs standing on land survey no.32/9, Village Colva of Salcete Taluka. The second respondent had given an undertaking on 10/10/2013 in Writ Petition No.295/13 that he will "demolish the structure admeasuring 66 sq.mtrs identified in the Checklist dated 15/7/2004 " submitted by the Mamlatdar of Salcete.
(3.) It appears that the petitioner filed Contempt Petition No.70/2013 alleging breach of the undertaking. The contempt petition was disposed of by this Court on 11/6/2014 permitting the petitioner, if he so desires, to get his grievance redressed about the non-compliance of the undertaking, namely, demolition of 66 sq.mtrs of the structure. The petitioner in consequence, moved the Deputy Collector. The Deputy Collector called the report of the Mamlatdar on 2/12/2014 and 13/7/2015 which showed that the structure admeasuring 46.33 sq.mtrs has been demolished and is covered on three sides by corrugated sheets. The learned Dy. Collector, however, came to the conclusion that the entire structure has been demolished completely and dismissed the application by order dated 24/7/2015. The petitioner obtained the certified copy of the order on 4/9/2015 and challenged the same before this Court in Writ Petition No.894/2015. On 10/2/2016, the Division Bench of this Court while permitting the petitioner to withdraw the petition granted liberty to the petitioner to resort to alternate remedy. The Division Bench specifically stipulated that in case an application for condonation of delay is filed (while resorting to alternate remedy), the concerned authority shall examine such application on its own merits considering section 14 of the Limitation Act and in accordance with law. Within 12 days of the withdrawal of the petition, the petitioner approached the Administrative Tribunal by filing an appeal along with an application for condonation of delay which was filed on 22/2/2016. The delay was said to be of 146 days.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.