Disposed

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

Bombay HC16 Dec 2014PIL/29/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL concerning forest and CRZ violations in Daman and Diu, the High Court directed appointment of an officer not below Collector rank to examine grievances after hearing parties, and disposed of the petition on these terms.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of an officer not below Collector rank to examine grievances; parties to attend Administrator's office.

Nachiket Yuvak Sangh Vs Administration of Daman and… — Environment and Pollution | Bombay HC (2014)

pil29-2008

ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION

¶5

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.29 OF 2008

¶6

Nachiket Yuvak Sangh...Petitioner
vs.
Administration of Daman
and Diu and others...Respondents

¶7

Mr.Uday Warunjikar for the petitioner
Mr.Ajit Kenjale for the respondent No.4
Mr.Shrishailya Deshmukh for respondent Nos.1 and 2

¶8

CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
 A.S.GADKARI, JJ.
 DATE : DECEMBER 16,2014

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and
the learned counsel for the respondent No.4.
Considering the nature of grievances made in this
petition, it will be appropriate if the appropriate
Officer of a higher rank appointed by the
Administrator of the Union Territory examines the
issues raised by the petitioner. If there are issues
concerning the violation of laws in relation to
forest and Costal Regulation Zone, the Officer so
nominated by the Administrator can look into the
grievances. If he finds that those grievances are
already decided, he will record that conclusion. If
necessary, he may call for the reports from the
concerned authorities dealing with Forest and CRZ.

¶11

pil29-2008

¶12

¶13

2 Hence, we pass the following order:

¶14

(I)We direct the representative of the
petitioner and the representative of the
respondent No.4 to attend the office of the
Administrator of the Union Territory, Daman and
Diu on 6th January 2015 at 11.00 a.m.;

¶15

(II) The Administrator will appoint appropriate Officer not below the rank of a Collector to look into the grievances made by the petitioner;

¶16

(III)The Officer so nominated shall hear the
petitioner and the respondent No.4. He will
permit the petitioner and the respondent No.4
to produce documents. The petitioner shall
file a compilation of the Writ Petition and the
affidavits on record before the Officer
nominated by the Administrator;

¶17

(IV)After hearing the parties in the light of
observations made above, the Officer nominated
by the Administrator shall pass an appropriate
order as expeditiously as possible and
preferably within a period of three months from
6th January 2015;

¶18

(V) Petition is disposed of on above terms.

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nachiket Yuvak Sangh v. Administration of Daman and Diu 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

Anil Mohanlal Kankriya Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sidheshwar Machhindra Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rajamma Vishwanath Sassatte Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Swast Dhanya Dukandar Sanghatana, Jalna Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Balasaheb Raghunath Jagtap and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shivaji Jagannath Kshirsagar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Shivaji Jagannath Kshirsagar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Mr. Hemant Baburao Patil Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

M/S. Powar and Sons, through Prop. Shri. Rajesh Shankarrao Powar, Throough Poa, Shri. R. v. Powar Vs Ld. District Collector of Kolhapur and Ors.

Dattatraya Ramchandra Kadam and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Rural Dept and Ors.

Vitthal Krishna Pawar Vs Grampanchayat Uchgaon through Its Sarpanch and Ors.

Smt. Manisha Sahebrao Gaikwad Vs Dr. W. B. Tayade

Suresh Ganpati Dhonukshe Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Avh Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Environment and Anr.