The Court dismissed a PIL where the petitioner, a Member of the Legislative Assembly, sought demolition of unauthorized constructions without first representing the issue to the concerned authority, granting only a liberty to approach appropriate authorities.
Liberty granted to make appropriate representation to the appropriate authority.
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.
DeshmaneDeshmane
1
39.PIL.117-14.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.117 OF 2014
Ganpat Kalu Gaikwad ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents
Mr. Raju D. Suryawanshi, for the Petitioner. Mr. V.S. Gokhale, AGP, for the Respondent Nos.1 and 3.
CORAM : A.S. OKA, AND A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.
DATE : 14th JULY, 2014
P.C.
1 / 2
Deshmane
2
39.PIL.117-14.doc
concerned authority. Moreover, page-31 of the Petition shows that the petitioner is a Member of the Maharashtra State Legislative Assembly. As a Member of the Legislative Assembly, the petitioner could have raised this issue in the House. He could have raised the issue by approaching appropriate authorities of the State Government. Therefore, at this stage, we are not inclined to entertain this Petition. Accordingly, we dispose of the Petition by granting a liberty to the petitioner to make appropriate representation to the appropriate authority.
2 / 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a PIL filed by a Member of the Legislative Assembly regarding unauthorized constructions can be entertained under Article 226 after no representation was made to the concerned authority.
Ganpat Kalu Gaikwad
The State of Maharashtra
A.S. OKA
A.S. CHANDURKAR
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
