1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 319/2009. Mr. Caetano Rosario Furtado alias Mr. Jacob Furtado, resident of House No. 1246/1, Mazilvaddo, Near Holy Trinity School, Benaulim, Salcete, Goa. ... Appellant. Versus. 1. Secretary/Sarpanch, Village Panchayat of Cana-Benaulim, Salcete, Goa. 2. Deputy Director of Panchayat, South Goa District, First Floor, Communidade Building, Margao, Salcete, Goa. 3. Additional Director of Panchayat-I, South Goa District, B.D.O. Office, Opposite to Presentation Convent, Margao Goa. ... Respondents. Mr. J. Godinho, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. G. Teles, Advocate for Respondent No. 1. Mr.G.Nagvekar, Advocate holding for Mr. S.R.Rivonkar, Government Advocate for Respondent Nos 2 and 3. 2 Coram: V.K. Tahilramani, J. N.A. Britto, J. DATE : 30th November, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT (Per.N.A. Britto,J.) Heard. Rule by consent heard forthwith. 2. The petitioner, by the present petition seeks a writ of Mandamus against the respondents authorities for execution of its orders mentioned in para 11(a) of the petition. 3. There is no dispute that a certain illegal construction carried out by one Joaquim Furtado was ordered to be demolished by respondent No. 1, Village Panchayat, by resolution dated 29.12.2004. Against the said resolution, the said Shri Furtado filed an appeal to the Deputy Director of Panchayat which came to be disposed off by order dated 29.12.2004. By this order, the said Shri Furtado was given an opportunity to apply for regularization of the said illegal construction within a period of 30 days. 3 4. Learned counsel on behalf of the respondent- Village Panchayat fairly concedes that the said Shri Furtado did not apply for regularization of the said illegal construction within the said stipulated period, by order dated 29.12.2004 nor sought extension of time. Thereafter, respondent No. 1 – Village Panchayat passed another resolution on 18.8.2009 for demolition of the said structure which resolution learned counsel informs is still in force and effect. 6. Before that, the said Shri Furtado filed another application before the Addl. Director of Panchayat which came to be rejected by order dated 9.7.2008. It is thus obvious that the said Shri Furtado has exhausted his remedy available to him under the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and cannot have another round for regularization, assuming for a moment, regularization of an illegal structure was otherwise permissible. 7. The resolutions/order passed by the Respondent- Authorities are still in force and full effect and therefore, are required to be executed. The said 4 Shri Furtado exhausted his remedies available to him, under the said Village Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. 8. The Village Panchayat is now bound to execute its resolutions dated 29.12.2004 and 18.8.2009 which are in full force and effect. Giving another opportunity to the said Shri Furtado to regularise the illegal construction, on the face of the said two resolutions will only amount to creating chaos and confusion with a view to defeat the provisions of the Village Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 which the Respondent-Authorities are required to uphold. 9. Consequently the petition succeeds. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer Clause (a). Compliance to be reported within a period of 8 weeks. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. N.A. BRITTO, J. MF/