Dismissed

Vijay Shankarrao Ghugare v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC19 Aug 2014CRPIL/37/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal PIL challenging an alleged irregularity in land allotment was dismissed on grounds of non-maintenance. The court held that the petitioner was remotely aggrieved and possessed alternative efficacious remedies like civil proceedings, writ petitions, or administrative representations, rendering the public interest filing unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The criminal public interest litigation petition seeking an FIR and investigation was dismissed.

Vijay Shankarrao Ghugare Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

CRPIL. 37-14

¶2

VPH

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 37 OF 2014

¶5

Vijay Shankarrao Ghugare ... Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents

¶6

¶7

Mr. Atul Kore, for the Petitioner.

¶8

Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent - State.

¶9

*** CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & P. D. KODE, JJ.

¶10

DATE : AUGUST 19, 2014

¶11

PC.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. Petitioner has filed this PIL seeking appropriate writ, order and direction, directing Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to register an FIR in respect of the alleged illegality mentioned in the petition and investigate the same in accordance with law. Alternatively, Petitioner is seeking writ of mandamus, thereby directing the CBI to register the offence and take out an appropriate proceeding.

¶13

It is an admitted position that private complaint was filed by one complainant and in the said complaint, learned Magistrate has directed the inquiry to be made and report was submitted. In the said report police officer has observed that main grievance of the complainant in the said case was that while making allotment of land

¶14

1 / 2

¶15

CRPIL. 37-14

¶16

by the Government, certain terms and conditions were not complied. It is observed in the report that complainant has remedy of pursuing the matter with the appropriate government authorities viz. the District Collector and other authorities. In the said report, it is also observed that the complainant of the said complaint can file an appropriate civil proceedings in the civil court.

¶17

After the said order was passed, the Petitioner who is aggrieved by the allotment of land in favour of the Respondents, has filed this PIL. In our view, taking into consideration the reliefs which are claimed by the Petitioner, it cannot be said that this petition is filed in the public interest. The Petitioner is also remotely aggrieved by virtue of the said order, and as such, in our view, this criminal PIL is not maintainable in law. Secondly, the report has been filed by the police, the original complainant who had filed complaint in view of the report submitted by the police, can pursue his remedy against the said order, which may be passed by the Magistrate. The Petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy of making representations to the concerned government officers, or filing appropriate proceedings before the State Government, or challenging the order of allotment by filing civil proceeding or a writ petition, if so advised. We do not see any substance in the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. PIL is, therefore, dismissed, reserving the right of the Petitioner, as aforesaid.

¶18

[P. D. KODE, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.]

¶19

Vinayak Halemath

¶20

2 / 2

Vijay Shankarrao Ghugare v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Shankarrao Ghugare v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

Haji Irfan Mitha Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Union of India Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sagardevi Salgia and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Johny Lonapan Kallikadan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Suresh Kacher Vaity Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Hemant Chandrakant Dangat Vs the State of Mahrashtra