Dismissed

Pradipkumar S/O Popatlal Vakharia v. Akola Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Municipal Commissioner, Akola and Another

Bombay HC24 Jul 2013PIL/115/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In PIL challenging land reservation, High Court of Bombay dismissed petition finding no challenge to development plan. Court directed deposit was made and permitted withdrawals; balance with interest refunded to petitioner, disposing of matter.

What did the court decide?

Balanced amount of Rs. 10,000/- with interest refunded to petitioner; petition dismissed.

Pradipkumar S/O Popatlal Vakharia Vs Akola Municipal… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

2407pil113&115.12

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 113 & 115 OF 2012

¶5

Pradeepkumar Popatlal Vakharia Vs. Akola Municipal Corporation & Ano.

¶6

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

¶7

Court's or Judge's Order

¶8

Shri H. R. Gadhia Adv for petitioner. Shri Amol Deshpande Adv for respondent 1. Shri M. G. Sarda Adv for respondent 2.

¶9

CORAM: B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & A.S.CHANDURKAR JJ.

¶10

DATED: 24^th JULY, 2013.

¶11

Heard petitioner in the light of order dated 29^th April 2013.

¶12

We find that though reservation of site no. 105 originally was a layout reservation and land was earmarked to be kept open as per orders of Collector dated 16^th August 1994. Later on in revised development plan under Section 31(6) of Maharashtra Regional And Town Planning Act 1966, the said site has been brought under residential zone. This development in 2004 is not assailed by petitioner in this Court. Development plan has been placed on record by the respondents on 1^st July 2013 and thereafter matter has been placed before this Court on 17^th July 2013 and thereafter today. There is no challenge on any

¶13

2407pil113&115.12

¶14

¶15

ground to said development plan. Petitioner is not a person residing in the concerned layout.

¶16

Shri Sarda, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2 relies upon the reply affidavit to show that respondent no. 2 has started a college on that site and that college is going on since last 5 years. He contends that petition has been filed malafidely by a person who claims to be a social worker. Respondents no. 1 and 2, therefore, claim costs.

¶17

Looking to the facts noted above we are not inclined to interfere in the matter. This Court has directed petitioner to deposit amount of Rs. 10,000/- to show his bonafides. Thus petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs. 20,000/- in two matters.

¶18

We permit Municipal Corporation to withdraw amount of Rs. 5000/- from it and we permit respondent no.2 in both matters to withdraw amount of Rs. 2500/- each from said amount. Balance amount of Rs. 10,000/- with proportionate interest accrued upon it shall be refunded to petitioner.

¶19

Accordingly we dispose of the present Public interest

Litigation.

JUDGE

JUDGE

svk

Pradipkumar S/O Popatlal Vakharia v. Akola Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Municipal Commissioner, Akola and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradipkumar S/O Popatlal Vakharia v. Akola Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Municipal Commissioner, Akola and Another

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

Baban Shankar Khandagale and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shri. Prashant Jaywant Doshi and Anr. Vs Pune Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Anil Jairam Mahajan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Adivasee Sarvangin Vikas Samtiee Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Appasaheb Babaji Patil and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Deepak Chandrakant Patodkar Vs Yeola Municipal Council Yeola and Ors.

Appasaheb Babaji Patil and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sanjay Bhaskarrao Kale and Anr. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Shri Deorao S/O Badhuji Bhagat Vs Nagpur Improvement Trust through Chairman and Another

Bhupendra Ramdhan Pawar Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Collector, Washim

Rahul Rathod Vs Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University Nagpur through Registrar and Another

Kala Sagar Shikshan Prasarak Mandal through President Vs Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University through Registrar and Others

Mamta D/O Ratiram Dharne Thr. Her Natural Guardian Father Shri Rm Dharne Vs the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certi. Scrutiny Committee, Gadchiroli and Another

Pradipkumar S/O Popatlal Vakharia Vs Akola Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Municipal Commissioner Akola and Another