Disposed

Mazarkhan Abdul Raheman Khan v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Bombay HC11 Oct 2012PIL/78/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court addressed a PIL highlighting the lack of basic facilities for the Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad. Directing the State to provide necessary support like vehicles and drivers, the Court disposed of the PIL while noting Government assurances of interim relief.

What did the court decide?

Directed the State Government to take expeditious steps to provide a vehicle and driver to the Presiding Officer of the Wakf Tribunal.

Mazarkhan Abdul Raheman Khan Vs the… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LIGITATION NO. 78 OF 2012 “Mazarkhan Abdul Raheman Khan vs. The State of Maharashtra and others”

¶4

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

¶5

¶6

Mr. J.H. Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioner Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for respondents.

¶7

CORAM :- NARESH H. PATIL & A.B. CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATE :- 11TH OCTOBER, 2012.

¶8

PER COURT :-

¶9

1] Heard.

¶10

2] Learned AGP has placed on record a communication issued by the Under Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra dated 28.9.2012. In fact, in normal course, State should not create situation, where, directions are required to be issued to the State for providing basic infrastructural facilities to the Courts, Tribunals or bodies discharging quasi-judicial functions.

¶11

3] Through this petition, the issue in respect of lack of basic facilities provided to the Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad is highlighted. It was submitted that even a four wheeler is not made available to the Presiding Officer of the Wakf Board, who is the member of District Judiciary, working on deputation on the Tribunal.

¶12

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶14

PUBLIC INTEREST LIGITATION NO. 78 OF 2012 “Mazarkhan Abdul Raheman Khan vs. The State of Maharashtra and others”

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

4] Learned AGP, on the basis of a communication, makes a statement that within 3 months vehicle would be made available for the use of the Presiding Officer. It is further submitted that no sooner a car is alloted to the Presiding Officer, the services of a driver would also be provided. She further submits that service of a stenographer has now been provided to the Presiding Officer.

¶18

. During the course of hearing, counsel for the petitioner submits that the Presiding Officer has acquired a care on his own by obtaining loan, so atleast, a driver should be provided within couple of weeks from today. Learned AGP to forward this request to the State Government.

¶19

5] We expect the State Government to take expeditious steps in this respect. With these directions, the PIL is disposed of.

¶20

[A.B. CHAUDHARI, J.]

¶21

[NARESH H. PATIL, J.]

¶22

grt/-

Mazarkhan Abdul Raheman Khan v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mazarkhan Abdul Raheman Khan v. the State of Mah 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

Santosh Gulabrao Dudhane and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shivaji Dattatray Pawar Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Sandip Popatrao Sonawane Vs Maharashtra State Co-Operative Tribal Development Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Shivmudra Pratisthan Vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority and Ors.

Girish Dattatraya Mahajan Vs the State of Maharashtra - Food and Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department and Ors.

Jairam Kuppuswami Mudliar Vs the Secretary Revenue and Forests Dept. and Ors.

Vikas Raghunath Gupte Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Parshuram Prabhakar Uparkar Vs the Sindhudurg District Central Co-Opeartive Bank and Ors.

Shreya Baburao Ambhore, Minor U/G Baburao Dagduji Ambhore Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Sulochanabai Fakirrao Kathawate Thr Gpa Balasaheb Fakirrao Kathwate and Ors. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Dinkar Narsinhrao Patil-Pawar and Ors. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Sundrabai Dhondiba Kakde Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Eknath Maruti Dinde Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Vitthal Laxman Ghodke Vs the State of Mah and Ors.