This PIL petition sought a writ directing authorities to take action against illegal sand lifting and assess losses. The Court found that sufficient action had already been initiated by the respondents, including suspension and recovery orders, and dismissed the petition.
Writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 pil71.12.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.71 OF 2012
(Diwakar Madhukarrao Mundane ..vs.. The Collector, Wardha and others)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders
Mr. N.D. Khamborkar, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. N.W. Sambre, G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 5.
CORAM : P.V. HARDAS & M.L. TAHALIYANI, JJ. DATED : AUGUST 24th, 2012.
This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by which the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ directing respondent No.1 to recover the loss, which is caused and take serious action against the persons involved in the illegal lifting of sand at village Antora, Tahsil-Ashti, District-Wardha. The petitioner also prays for issuance of a writ to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to take immediate steps for assessing the loss caused due to illegal lifting of sand. The petitioner also prays for instituting the enquiry against all the erring officers and to recover damages.
2 pil71.12.odt
Antora, (2) An offence is registered against the respondent No.6 on the basis of complaint lodged by Tahsildar, Ashti vide communication dated 3rd July, 2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 379 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code, (3) The Tahsildar, Ashti has passed an order on 5th July, 2012 directing recovery of Rs.70,00,000/- as royalty and fine from respondent N.6 towards illegal mining carried out by him, (4) The Collector, Wardha has issued a show cause notice against the Tahsildar, Ashti on 30th June, 2012 for not supervising the work of the Talathi and noticing the illegal mining, and (5) Two boats, two generators, 32 drums and 20 iron pipes have been seized from the custody of respondent No.6.
3 pil71.12.odt
within our domain to direct the respondent Nos.1 to 5 to initiate action of black listing of the contractor. The respondent Nos.1 to 5 obviously would take such action as is warranted in law in the light of the affidavit-inreply filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 5.
JUDGE JUDGE
pma
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ court should interfere when actions against illegal mining have already been initiated.
Diwakar Madhukarrao Mundane
The Collector, Wardha
P.V. Hardas
M.L. Tahaliyani
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
