Allowed

Vishal S/O Vasantrao Khandekar v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary Revenue Department Mumbai and 7 Others

Bombay HC2 Apr 2014CAO/492/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court allowed interveners in PIL No. 75 of 2013 and CAO Nos. 492 and 493 of 2014 concerning alleged corruption in the City Survey Office. The court directed the Secretary, Revenue Department to investigate the claims.

What did the court decide?

Interveners' applications allowed; petition for inquiry into City Survey Office affairs allowed; Secretary (Revenue) directed to inquire within 3 months.

Vishal S/O Vasantrao Khandekar Vs the State of Maharashtra through… — Corruption | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

1/3

¶2

0204pil75.13.odt

¶3

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

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 75 OF 2013

¶5

(Vishal Vasantrao Khandekar Vs. State of Maharashtra & others) AND

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO. 492 OF 2014

¶7

(Vishal Vasantrao Khandekar Vs. The State of Maharashtra & others – Intervener : M/s Shruti Promoters) AND

¶8

CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO. 493 OF 2014

¶9

(Vishal Vasantrao Khandekar Vs. The State of Maharashtra & others – Intervener : Madhukar Sheshrao Kale)

¶10

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

¶11

- - - - Shri S. J. Khandalkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Smt. B. H. Dangre, A.G.P. for respondents No. 1, 2, 3 & 8. Shri Rajnish Vyas, Advocate for respondent No.4. Shri A. G. Gharote, Advocate for respondent No.5. Shri Arvind Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent No.6. Shri A. C. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for respondent No.7.

¶12

Shri B. G. Kulkarni, Advocate for intervener/applicant in CAO No. 492/2014. Shri S. A. Kalbande, Advocate for intervener/applicant in CAO No. 493/2014.

¶13

CORAM : B. R. GAVAI AND

¶14

C. V. BHADANG, JJ. DATED : 2^nd APRIL, 2014

¶15

Civil Applications (CAO) No.492 & 493 of 2014 :

¶16

Both these civil applications for intervention are

¶17

allowed.

¶18

P.I.L. NO. 75/2013 :

¶19

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner in the larger public interest contending therein that respondents No.3 to 7, while acting in the office of City Survey at Nagpur, have committed large scale illegality, thereby resulting in undue advantage to the various builders and causing substantial loss to

¶20

2/3

¶21

0204pil75.13.odt

¶22

the public exchequer.

¶23

The affidavit-in-reply to the petition is filed by one Shri Dadabhau Sonu Talape, Deputy Director of Land Records, Nagpur thereby stating that an enquiry is conducted in the affairs of the City Survey Office.

¶24

However, it was brought to our notice that the said person, who has sworn in an affidavit, has caught red handed while receiving an amount of Rs. 5 lac in an anti-corruption raid.

¶25

Taking into consideration this aspect of the matter, when the matter was called out in the morning session, it was passed over to noon session for seeking instructions as to whether highest officer in the Department of Revenue is willing to conduct an enquiry into the affairs of the City Survey Office.

¶26

When the matter was called out in the second half, the learned Government Pleader stated that the Secretary, Revenue Department has agreed to conduct enquiry into the affairs of the City Survey Office at Nagpur.

¶27

We, therefore, direct the Secretary, Revenue Department to conduct an enquiry into the affairs of the City Survey Office at Nagpur. The Secretary (Revenue) shall also conduct an enquiry and find out as to whether any undue advantage has been given by committing such an

¶28

3/3

¶29

0204pil75.13.odt

¶30

illegality/irregularity to any private individual. The Secretary (Revenue) shall also fix the responsibility on the officer/s concerned and shall report this Court as to what action is proposed to be taken against such officer/s, who is/are found guilty.

¶31

We grant three months' time to the Secretary (Revenue) to conduct such an enquiry and submit his report. It is further made clear that the Secretary (Revenue) shall be at liberty to take assistance of such other officer/s as he found necessary in conducting the enquiry.

¶32

If the petitioner or intervenors so desire, they are always at liberty to place the relevant material for consideration of the Secretary (Revenue).

¶33

Stand over to 02/7/2014 .

¶34

JUDGE JUDGE

¶35

wwl

Vishal S/O Vasantrao Khandekar v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary Revenue Department Mumbai and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal S/O Vasantrao Khandekar v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary Revenue Department Mumbai and 7 Others

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

Hiralal Harijan @ Chamar S/O Rammanohar Harijan @ Chamar (in Jail) Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anis Khan Dilawar Khan (in Jail) Vs the D.I.G. Prison (East), Nagpur and Another

Manoj Ghanashyamdas Rathi Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Home Dept. and 3 Others

Shri Bajrang Zumarlal Sharma (Pandia) Vs Development Commissioner , Mumbai and Others

Vishal S/O Vasantrao Khandekar Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary Revenue Department Mumbai and 7 Others

Dr. Vishnu S/O Shankarrao Ukande Vs the State of Maharashtra Department of Planning through Its Secretary, Mumbai and 3 Others