Mapusa council chief defends hiring process amid criticism
Panaji: After facing criticism for alleged “procedural irregularities” in the hiring process of six contractual staff members, Mapusa Municipal Council (MMC) chairperson Nutan Bicholkar defended her actions. She said her decisions were consistent with the practices followed by her predecessors for similar appointments.
The councillors contested the legitimacy of the appointments of four clerks and two stenographers, stating that they were based on an “unconfirmed” resolution. They alleged that Bicholkar proceeded with the recruitment process without adhering to the mandatory requirement of confirming the resolution in a council meeting.
The councillors contested the legitimacy of the appointments of four clerks and two stenographers, stating that they were based on an “unconfirmed” resolution. They alleged that Bicholkar proceeded with the recruitment process without adhering to the mandatory requirement of confirming the resolution in a council meeting.
During a recent meeting, the councillors voted to reject the hiring of the staff. Bicholkar said, “When allegations of irregularities surfaced, I raised questions about their previous practices, but they dismissed them as history.”
She added, “This seems contradictory, considering the present council took office in April 2021, and similar recruitment procedures were implemented in 2022 and 2023 with the same councillors in position.”
She said the timing of objections appears questionable. “In the past, recruitment was done on the resolution passed by the council,” she said. “If confirmation is indeed a mandatory requirement, one must question why this criterion wasn’t enforced in earlier instances.”
The MMC chairperson said the posts were advertised and required approval, which had been secured.
Bicholkar told TOI that the director of municipal administration will examine the allegations to determine if the recruitment was legal.
During the meeting, councillor Prakash Bhivshet accused Bicholkar of attempting to transfer two municipal shops to her husband’s name. However, Bicholkar rubbished his claim, stating that she moved a file only for the renewal of the lease agreement of one shop, which is in her husband’s name and from where she practises medicine.
“We have followed the required procedures and met all the criteria for the renewal of a lease. It’s only for renewal and not transfer,” she said. “We paid taxes, obtained a trade licence, etc. The file is in process and not yet approved. These allegations are being made to malign my image.”
Next Story