-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 376 OF 2005 AND WRIT PETITION NO. 371 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO. 376 OF 2005 1. Shri Shivdas Gopi Usapkar, r/o Ward No. 4, Billow Peddem, Mapusa, Goa 2. Shri Swapnil Vilas Shirodkar, c/o Silent Club, Behind Government Primary School, Corlim, Mapusa, Goa. 3. Mrs. Maria Charmaine Gonsalves, wife of Shri Jack Alex Gonsalves, r/o T1/T2, Staywell Apts., Corlim, Mapusa, Goa. ........... Petitioners V e r s u s 1. The Director, Directorate of Municipal Administration/ Urban Development, having office at Collectorate Building, Panaji, Goa. 2. The State of Goa through its Chief Secretary, having office at Secretariat, Porvorim, Goa 3. The State Election Commission through the Chief Electoral Officer, having office at Altinho, Panaji, Goa. ...... Respondents ( Above are the Regd. addresses) Mr. N. Sardessai, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Mr. A. Kamat, Additional Government Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Mr. V.P. Thali, Advocate for Respondent No. 3 -2- WRIT PETITION NO. 371 OF 2005 1. Shri Roopesh R. Mahatme, r/o 253/205, Sapana Arcade, Malbhat, Margao, Goa. 2. Shri Durgadas V. Prabhu, r/o H. No. 645, F. Behind Fondu Raikar House, Gogal, Margao, Goa ........... Petitioners V e r s u s 1. State of Goa through its Chief Secretary, having office at Secretariat, Porvorim, Goa 2. The Director, Directorate of Municipal Administration/ Urban Development, having office at Collectorate Building, Panaji, Goa 3. Mamlatdar of Salcete Taluka having office at Collectorate Building, Margao, Goa. 4. Margao Municipal Council through its Chief Officer, having office at Municipal Building, Margao, Goa. 5. Shri Digambar V. Kamat, Minister for Power, Government of Goa, having office at Secretariat, Panaji, Goa and residing at Sanrit Apts., Malbhat, Margao, Goa. ...... Respondents ( Above are the Regd. addresses) Mr. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Mr. A. Kamat, Additional Government Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Mr. V.P. Thali, Advocate for Respondent No. 3 -3- Coram:- S.B. DESHMUKH & F.M. REIS, JJ Date:- 02 nd December, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT ( per S. B. DESHMUKH, J) We have heard learned Counsel Mr. N. Sardessai for the Petitioner, Advocate General for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Mr. V.P. Thali, for Respondent No. 3. 2. The Petitioner challenges the notification dated 01st September, 2005 with Corrigendum dated 09th September, 2005. The Notification and Corrigendum concerned are at Annexure A & B. We have perused these documents. 3. The Notification in question has been issued by the Director, Administration Urban Development in exercise of the powers under section (1) of Section 10 of the Goa Municipalities Act, 1968 ( for short 'the said Act') read with section 9 of the said Act. The Notification purpose was for the reservation of the seats for women pertaining to election of Mapusa Municipal Council. We have also considered the Corrigendum which is placed on record. The Counsel present before the Court agree that the election in question has taken place and term of the same is also over. In view of this the writ petition has become infructuous. Writ Petition stands disposed of being infructious with no order as to costs. -4- 4. In relation to W.P. 371 of 2005 we have heard the leaned counsel for the Respondents. This Writ Petition pertains to election of Margao Municipal Council. The Counsel for the parties agree that except this all other facts are similar to Writ Petition No. 376 of 2005. In other words, by lapse of time the election is taken place and term of election concerned had been over. In view of this, Writ Petition has become infructuous. Writ Petition stands disposed of being infructious with no order as to costs. S. B. DESHMUKH, J F. M. REIS, J ars