Mormugao Municipal Council allowed two shops to be sold to a third party
While Ponda Municipal Council faces dissolution merely dueto failure to clean garbage, Mormugao Municipal Council’s list ofirregularities warrants nothing than a serious scrutiny of the Council’saffairs. For Goa’s biggest Municipal Council, it would be hardly impossible foranyone to believe that due to a financial crunch of only Rs 9 lakh the MormugaoMunicipal Council remained a mute spectator and allowed two shops to be sold toa third party. But it did happen.
Documents under RTI document in possession with the The Goanpoints out that MMC made no efforts to protect its property -- Shop No. 1 and 2of Modern Market which was transferred under absolute ownership to one JyotiDeshpande and Vinette De’ Souza after the council failed to comply with its ownagreement of September 24, 1984 between MMC and them.
The council had acquired a piece of land admeasuring 240 and120 square meters occupied by Jyoti Deshpande and Vinette De’Souza respectivelyin order to construct a market complex.
In return MMC had agreed to hand over portion of first floorof the said market complex with reduced area of 120 and 90 square meters respectivelyto the two parties. However, as the council failed to construct the first floorof the mentioned market within stipulated time, the matter landed up in theHigh Court.
The HC in an order asked MMC whether it was willing to allowthe applicant Jyoti Deshpande and Vinette De’ Souza to occupy already completedshops on the said market complex under licence basis and that the applicantswould pay rent to MMC and also handover the premises back after MMC hands overthe possession of their premises as per the agreement.
After obtaining statutory permission from the DMA, the thenchief officer (present Collector – South Goa), N D Agarwal on October 21, 2004signed a deed in exchange to the surrender of tenancy right with JyotiDeshpande and Vinette De’ Souza with a clause that in an event the partydecides to dispose off the rights of titled premises, MMC shall have the firstright to buy the said shops. These deeds were registered with the Sub-Registrar,Mormugao under serial no.1466/2004 and 1465/2004.
N D Agarwal however clarifies: “Although the matter is veryold and difficult for me to remember, however, I am very well aware that suchdeed did take place where two shops were allowed to be sold but the same wasdone only with consultation of legal advisor of the council.
The matter was also referred to law department who gavegreen signal for such deed”.
Surprisingly, little less than a year later on October 5,2005 Jyoti Deshpande and Vinette De’ Souza sent a letter to MMC giving them firstoption to purchase Shop No 1 and 2 at a cost of Rs 9 lakh each within 30 daysfailing which they would sell the property to third party.
The Goan’s investigations reveal that despite of receivingthe letter on time the then MMC head clerk, Michael D’Souza and otheradministrative officers kept the letter pending and only after the expiryperiod that is on November 7, 2005 prepared a note to the then chief officer,Y. B. Tavde as well as chairperson for their comments.
Although, the chief officer refrained to write anything onthe note, the then chairperson Nitin alias Sharad Chopdekar wrote: “Since thenotice period has already expired there is no need to place the matter before thecouncil. Moreover the council’s position is not sound to purchase the shops atpresent and also the economy of town is not so good. In view of the same, we mayclose the matter”.
When asked as to how a chairperson can put noting mentioningthe financial position of the council as weak and how such deed took placewithout council resolution, Agarwal explains, “All legal aspects was taken intoconsideration before signing the deed”. He however claimed that when he washolding chair as the Chief Officer, Nitin Chopdekar (who put the noting) wasnot sitting on chairperson’s chair.
Goa Municipality Act of 1968 debars the sale of anymunicipal property. In this case, the Council would have taken up the matterseriously as it was related to municipal property but instead the file was keptpending for full expiry of notice period.
Also if the council noticed the file at the last moment theycould have either asked for some time from the party or would have asked theDMA to provide the funds to take back the transferred property. But nothing ofthat sort happened and instead the shops were allowed to be sold.
The shops since then have been sold by the land owners.
