Disposed

The Courts on Its Own Motion v. Nagpur Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Commissioner and Anr.

Bombay HC6 Feb 2012PIL/63/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a PIL regarding the provision of adequate toilets in Nagpur, directing the appropriate authority to finalize the sanction plan and provide necessary funds for constructing more public urinals and toilets.

What did the court decide?

The PIL was disposed of with a direction to finalize the sanction plan and provide necessary funds for constructing more public toilets.

The Courts on Its Own Motion Vs Nagpur… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

1/3

¶2

06.02.pil.63.10

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.63 / 2010 (The Court on its own Motion vs. Nagpur Municipal Corporation and another )

¶5

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

¶6

Mr. Uday Dastnae, (Amicus Curiae)

¶7

Mr. S.K. Mishra Adv.for respondent no.1

¶8

Mr. Nitin Sambre,Govt. Pleader for Respondent no.2

¶9

CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR & P.B.VARALE, JJ DATED : 6^th February, 2012.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the respective

¶11

parties.

¶12

This Court has suo motu took up the issue as regards providing adequate toilets in the city of Nagpur. This Court had passed a plethora of orders from time to time in this PIL.

¶13

On behalf of the Respondent No.1-Corporation, an affidavit has been filed by one Vishnu Bute, Additional Commissioner of the Nagpur Municipal Corporation wherein the following particulars in para nos. 2 and 3 have been given, which are couched in the following terms :-

¶14

“2. It is submitted that there are total 50 Sulabh Shouchalayas in 10 zones of the city of Nagpur, out of which 260 seats are meant

¶15

2/3

¶16

06.02.pil.63.10

¶17

for gents and 134 seats for ladies. It is further submitted that there are total 88 public and urinals in the 10 zones of Nagpur city, out of which 791 seats are for gents and 743 for ladies. It is further submitted that there are total 125 urinals ( FRP and concrete) in the 10 zones of the city of Nagpur out of which 214 seats are made for gents and 17 for ladies.

¶18

It is further submitted that the list of Sulabh Shouchalayas , public latrines and Urinals in each Zone, the extract of the above-referred details regarding the Sulabh Shouchalayas , public toilets and urinals with number of seats available for gents and ladies is already filed herewith and marked as Annexure No.A.”

¶19

Mr. Uday Dastane, learned amicus curiae however, stressed the need of more urinals. He contended that in the Master Plan the same has been suggested but adequate financial help is required to be given by the Corporation. So far as the proposal of the Corporation for providing more urinals in the city of Nagpur is concerned, the Central Government who is required to monitor the Development Plan, has to consider the same appropriately and if any additional funds are required for constructing urinals and toilets

¶20

3/3

¶21

06.02.pil.63.10

¶22

necessary funds may be made available without delay in this behalf.

¶23

In view of the averments made in para nos. 2 and 3 of the affidavit ( supra), no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the PIL pending in this Court. However it is disposed of with a direction that the proposed sanction plan to be finalized by the appropriate authority expeditiously and if any funds are required, appropriate authority may manage for providing said funds to the Corporation so that the Corporation can proceed further in the matter of constructing more toilets as per the Master Plan and the public at large may not suffer in this behalf. The appropriate authority may accordingly take appropriate steps in connection with such financial assistance in this behalf.

¶24

Subject to what is stated above, Public Interest Litigation is disposed of.

¶25

JUDGEJUDGE

¶26

sahare

The Courts on Its Own Motion v. Nagpur Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Commissioner and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Courts on Its Own Motion v. Nagpur Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Commissioner and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Vishwasrao Sukhdeo Deokar Vs State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Navnath Keshav Kapse Vs State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Vishwasrao Sukhdeo Deokar Vs State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Navnath Keshav Kapse Vs State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shetkari Sangharsh Samitee and Anr. Vs the Additional Commissioner, Konkan Division and Ors.

Dr. Santosh Sudhakarrao Kulkarni Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

manubhai p. vashi Vs state of maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Shail Rane and 2 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 9 Ors.

Krishnagopal Wasudeoprasad Mishra, Katol Vs the District and Sessions Judge, Nagpur and 12 Others

Sau. Naina Rameshwar Dhonge Vs Selection Committee, of Anganwadi Sevika Under Panchayat Samiti Thr. Its Secty. and Ors.

Nagpur Distt. Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Vs State of Mah Thr. Its Secy. and 1 Anr.

Sanjay S/O Ukha Ingle Vs the Superintending Engineer, Minor Irrigation (Local Sector) Circle, Near Commissioner Officer and

Ashok Mahadeorao Gawai Vs the Joint Director (Higher Education) and Oths

Ku. Manjula Chitamanji Dharamsare, Now Known as Sou. Sneha W/O Devidas Akare Vs Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Gondia and Another