Disposed

Rajamma Vishwanath Sassatte v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC15 Dec 2014PIL/146/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL regarding alleged misappropriation and negligence in a Water Supply Scheme under 'Bharat Nirman', the Court granted leave to the petitioner to file a detailed representation naming committee members. The respondents were directed to consider this within eight weeks, with directions to approach the Court again if grievances remain unredressed.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to file detailed representation naming committee members; respondents directed to consider grievance within four to eight weeks.

Rajamma Vishwanath Sassatte Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

(1) PIL No. 146 of 2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶3

Public Interest Litigation No. 146 of 2014

¶4

Rajamma w/o.Vishwanath Sassatte, Age : 54 years, Occupation : Agriculture & Social Work, R/o. Atnoor, Taluka : Jalkot, District : Latur. .. Petitioner.

¶5

versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra, Through Chief Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32, & 8 others. .. Respondents.

¶7

Mr. C.D. Biradar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶8

Mr. S.S. Tope, Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶9

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & A.M. BADAR, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 15TH DECEMBER 2014

¶11

COURT'S ORDER (Per B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.) :

¶12

Heard Adv. Mr. C.D. Biradar for the petitioner, and learned GP Mr. S.S. Tope for respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶13

(2) PIL No. 146 of 2014

¶14

The petitioner himself was Sarpanch after 2005. Grievance is, between 2006 to 2010, the work of Water Supply Scheme, under project ‘Bharat Nirman Panipurvatha Yojana’ was not properly carried out and it has resulted in misappropriation.

¶15

Adv. Mr. Biradar has invited our attention to two reports available on record. The last such report is dated 14th July 2014.

¶16

Perusal of reports show some irregularities and also negligence in the work. The petitioner also appears to have made representations from time to time. However, nowhere he has specifically named any particular member of Water Supply Committee. Those members are joined as respondents nos.7 to 9 in the present PIL.

¶17

Adv. Mr. Biradar, during arguments, has stated that the work is not complete even today.

¶18

As the PIL appears to have been filed bona fide, we grant petitioner, leave to file appropriate representation in detail, pointing out the names of members of the Committee, with particular like designation, their acts or omission and commission with material which has come on record in enquiry report. If such representation is received by respondent no.2 - Chief Executive Officer, within a period of four weeks from today, respondent no.3 shall consider it within next eight weeks.

¶19

If grievance of the petitioner is not redressed thereafter, it will

¶20

PIL No. 146 of 2014

¶21

be open for the petitioner to approach this Court again in the matter.

¶22

With these observations, we dispose of present PIL. No costs.

¶23

( A.M. BADAR ) ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE JUDGE

¶24

puranik / PIL146.14

Rajamma Vishwanath Sassatte v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajamma Vishwanath Sassatte v. the State of Maharashtra and 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

Hrishikesh Rajendra Bhalerao Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vinayak Alias Nandkumar Bapurao Santan Vs the Tahsildar Mahur and Ors.

Shri Pratap R. Yadav Vs Thane Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Dharavi Baitt Bachao Samiti and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Pandurang Himmat Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Majahar Jamil Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shri. Vijay Prabhakar Bhosale Vs Union of India, through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Nachiket Yuvak Sangh Vs Administration of Daman and Diu and Ors.

Gopal Prabhakar Bhagwat Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer and Ors.

Krushnabai Gajendra Telang and Another Vs the Union of India and Others

The Executive Engineer Krishna Khore Vikas Mahamandal M.I., Osmanabad Vs Bhonaji Bajirao Palve and Others

Uday Manohar Gandhewar Vs Municipal Council, Kinwat Thr Chief Officer and Ors.

Pradnya Mahendra Khillare and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Nago Pundalik Ganar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others