Disposed

Bharat Nagar Nagrik Mandal Thr. Its Secty v. the N.M.C. Thr. Its Municipal Commissioner and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Feb 2012PIL/9/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PIL regarding monkey relocation from Bharat Nagar and Ravi Nagar. Court noted monkeys captured and resettled. Directed authority to ensure follow-up action, vigilance against attacks, and prevent future fatalities. Petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Directed authority to ensure follow-up action, remain vigilant against monkey attacks, and take appropriate steps if new complaints are received.

Bharat Nagar Nagrik Mandal Thr. Its… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

P.I.L.No.09/10

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 09 of 2010

¶5

BHARAT NAGAR NAGRIK MANDAL VERSUS

¶6

NAGPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER

¶7

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶9

¶10

Mr. S. S. Sanyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J. B. Kasat, Advocate for Respondent no.1 Mr. N. W. Sambre, Govt. Pleader for respondent no. 2.

¶11

CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR AND P.B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : 22^nd FEBRUARY, 2012.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

By way of this writ petition, the petitionerMandal has raised the point regarding catching and relocating the monkeys of two areas of Nagpur city namely Bharat Nagar and Ravi Nagar, which posed danger to the residents of these areas.

¶14

The learned Government Pleader today states before this Court that as per his instructions, till this date 44 monkeys have been captured by the Corporation and they have been sent to the nearby forest, which is located at a distance of 60 Kms near Ramtek tahsil.

¶15

Considering the statement made by the learned Government Pleader, it is clear that the authority has taken steps regarding capturing the monkeys and now they have been re-settled in the forest area, which is at a far distance from Nagpur city. In view of the same, since the authority is

¶16

2 P.I.L.No.09/10

¶17

already taking the steps for catching the monkeys from the different areas, including the areas in question i.e. Bharat Nagar and Ravi Nagar, now it is not necessary to keep the matter pending. However, the authority is directed to regularly take follow-up action in this regard and in case any complaint is received from any area, the appropriate steps should be taken for catching the monkeys. As in the instant case, it is brought to the notice of this Court that somebody has died because of the attack of the monkeys, the authority is directed to be more vigilant in this behalf and to see that such type of incident may not happen in future.

¶18

Subject to these directions, the Public Interest Litigation is disposed of.

¶19

JUDGE

¶20

JUDGE

¶21

Diwale

Bharat Nagar Nagrik Mandal Thr. Its Secty v. the N.M.C. Thr. Its Municipal Commissioner and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Nagar Nagrik Mandal Thr. Its Secty v. the N.M.C. Thr. Its Municipal Commissioner and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kaustubh S/O Uttamrao Fule Vs Union of India, through Its Chief Secretary and Another

Aparajit S/O Anandrao Ninawe Vs Dr. S.Y. Quraishi, Chief Election Commissioner, and Anr.

Doodh Utpadak Kalayankari Sangh and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bhausaheb Kachru Dube Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Moinuddin Khan Hazi Anwarul Haq Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Shri. Suresh Shamrao Powar Vs State of Maharashtra, through Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Shri. Suresh Shamrao Powar Vs State of Maharashtra, through Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Telang Road Residents Association and 12 Ors., Vs State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Pankaj S/O Gangadhar Wahane Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Director of Technical Edun. and 2 Ors.

Swapnil S/O Bhimrao Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Director of Technical Education and 2 Others

Tejsingh Shyamraoji Saoji Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Pr. Secty. and Anr.

Noble Explochem Limited, through Its Chairman and Executive Director Vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation, through Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Nagpur and Ano

Little Flower English Convent Thr. Its President Vs the State Govt. Secondary Edun. Thr. Its Secty. and Ors.

Mrs. Bhawna Prabodh Ukey Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Public Works Deparment and Another