Writ petition directing respondents to construct cross-drainage by 31 March 2015 to resolve water-logging damaging petitioner's fields.
Direction to respondents to complete construction of cross-drainage by 31st March 2015; liberty to approach Court again for non-compliance with direction.
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.
G.A.Ghule [P.A.]
1/2
wp 8337.12_1.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
WRIT PETITION NO. 8337 OF 2012.
SHRIRANG RAMCHANDRA GADEKAR AND ORS. VERSUS THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS.
...
Appearance =>
Mr. Lokhande Kishor N., Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. P.P. More, Asstt.Govt.Pleader for the State of Maharashtra.
Mr. Suryawanshi Kamlakar, Advocate for Resp.No.6.
CORAM : B.P. Dharmadhikari & A.M. Badar, JJ. DATE : 23rd December, 2014.
Per Court :-
Heard respective counsel. Mr. Kishor Lokhande, learned counsel argued that, because the cross-drainage has not been provided, water accumulates on his side of the road and, therefore, field remains water-logged and uncultivated. This has caused serious damage to the soil and also to the fertility.
[2] Heard Mr. Kamlakar Suryawanshi, learned counsel appearing for Resp.No.6 [ Contractor ].
[3] The learned Asstt.Govt.Pleader for the State has relied upon the reply affidavit . Reply affidavit shows need of two such cross drainages. It appears that some provisions was also made therefor but adjacent owners
2/2
wp 8337.12_1.sxw
obstructed, therefore, cross drainage has not been constructed. The constructor was also not paid fully and hence he could not complete that work.
[4] The cross drainage is to be provided below public road so as to allow the water which is accumulating on one side of the road to proceed down the street on the other side. If such cross drainage is constructed, problem of the petitioner and others would be solved. We therefore, direct respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to undertake that work and to complete it but in any case by 31st March, 2015.
[5] If the petitioner finds that work is not commenced or will not be completed accordingly, liberty to him to approach this court again in the matter. If he is required to approach this court again in the matter, respondents shall be required to pay exemplary costs for his undue harassment. With these directions, we allow the Petition and dispose of it accordingly. No costs.
(A.M. BADAR, J.) (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondents are directed to construct cross-drainage to prevent water-logging affecting cultivated fields.
Shrirang Ramchandra Gadekar and Ors.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
B.P. Dharmadhikari
A.M. Badar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
