1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 553 OF 2008. Mr. Joao Paul Fernandes, Son of Inacio Fernandes, R/o H. No.313/1, Francisco Costa Waddo, Utorda, Salcete, Goa. .. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Goa, Through it's Chief Secretary, Secretariat Complex, Porvorim, Goa. 2. The Additional Director of Panchayats-I, South Goa District, Salcete, Margao Goa. 3. Village Panchayat of Majorda- Utorda-Calata, Through it's Sarpanch, Majorda, Salcete, Goa. .. Respondents Mr. Mahesh Amonkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shirodkar, Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Z. D'Souza, Advocate for the respondent No.3. Coram :- A. P. LAVANDE, J. Date :- 2 nd December, 2008. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Mahesh Amonkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Shirodkar, learned Government Counsel for the 2 respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. Z. D'Souza, learned Counsel for the respondent No.3. 2. Rule. By consent heard forthwith. 3. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 09.07.2008 passed by the respondent No.2 disposing of Panchayat Appeal No.MAR-I/10/2007 preferred by the appellant under Section 175 read with Section 178 of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act,1994. The said appeal was preferred against final notice dated 26.09.2007 issued by Village Panchayat, Majorda-Utorda, Calata. 4. Although several grounds have been urged in the memo of petition, the petition is liable to be allowed on the ground that the order does not disclose the reasons. The impugned order is cryptic and no detailed reasons have been given for dismissing the appeal. Perusal of memo of appeal filed before the respondent No.2, discloses that in support of the appeal, the petitioner had urged several grounds which according to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, were urged before the Appellate Authority. From the bare perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the Appellate Authority had not considered all the grounds urged and has passed the impugned order. On this ground alone, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and is, accordingly, 3 set aside. 5. The respondent No.2 is directed to dispose of the appeal after hearing the parties. The respondent No.2 shall deal with all the contentions that may be raised during the course of the arguments and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. The parties shall appear before the respondent No.2 on 15.12.2008 at 3.00 p.m. The Appellate Authority shall dispose of the appeal expeditiously and in any case on or before 31.01.2009. 6. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. A. P. LAVANDE, J. SMA