VIKESH SHAMBA PHADTE v. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AND 6 ORS
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
The Petition is dismissed however clarifying that after the report
Provisions considered
- Panchayat Raj Act s. 66(5)
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. The petition is dismissed with the above clarification. VALMIKI MENEZES, J. Signed by: MEENA VISHAL BHOIR Designation: Private Secretary Date: 10/01/2025 11:18:58 9th January, 2025
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO.463 OF 2023 VIKESH SHAMBA PHADTE Versus THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AND 6 ORS ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS Mr. Preetam Talaulikar, Advocate for the Petitioner. CORAM:- VALMIKI MENEZES, J. DATED :- 9th January, 2025 P.C.:
After hearing the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, I find no infirmity with the order impugned in this petition. The Director of Panchayats cannot be said to have acted in transgression of the powers vested in it under Section 66(5) of the Panchayat Raj Act and appointing the BDO to carry out the inspection of the site and to ascertain and survey the exact location of the structure in the land under Survey No.156(part) and 156/1B. This was obviously necessitated to ascertain whether the allegation in the complaint of the Respondents that the Petitioner had constructed an illegal construction encroaching in Survey No.156(1B).
Operative part
The Petition is dismissed however clarifying that after the report of the survey is placed before the Director of Panchayats, all the 9th January, 2025 WP 463 of 2023 parties would be entitled to file their objections to the report and the Director of Panchayats will have to consider the objections while disposing of the application.
The petition is dismissed with the above clarification. VALMIKI MENEZES, J. Signed by: MEENA VISHAL BHOIR Designation: Private Secretary Date: 10/01/2025 11:18:58 9th January, 2025
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The Petition is dismissed however clarifying that after the report
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Panchayat Raj Act — s. 66(5).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 09 Jan 2025. The bench was VALMIKI MENEZES.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.