Dismissed

Nainesh Suresh Dolas v. the Chairman of Aicte, All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.

Bombay HC14 Jan 2015PIL/147/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A PIL petitioner seeking directions regarding deficiencies at a college. The court, noting the matter was already addressed in earlier proceedings, found no cause to entertain the petition. It dismissed the application and indicated costs would be considered if similar petitions are filed again.

What the court decided

AI extract

Nainesh Suresh Dolas Vs the Chairman of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

skn 1/2 147.14-pil.sxw

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 147 OF 2014

¶4

Nainesh Suresh Dolas ... Petitioner. V/s. The Chairman of AICTE, All India Council for Technical Education & ors. ... Respondents.

¶5

Mahendra M. Agavekar for the petitioner.

¶6

M.A.Choudhari for respondent No.10.

¶7

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND A.S. GADKARI, JJ. DATED : 14^th January 2015.

¶8

P.C.

¶9

The petitioner claims to be a social worker. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent college is not functioning properly; there are certain deficiencies against which he raised certain proceedings before the revenue authorities and the Court. In this petition, the petitioner prays for following directions:

¶10

a) Direction to respondent Nos.1 to 5 to take decision regarding the illegalities and deficiencies of the college as described in the representations made by the petitioner within a period of one month.

¶11

b) Direction to respondent Nos.6 to 9 to take decision regarding the illegalities and deficiencies of the college as described in the representations made by the petitioner within a period o one month.

¶12

skn 2/2 147.14-pil.sxw

¶13

The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.10 submits hat the petitioner has no locus to raise the issue which are raised in this petition. He is in habit of filing petitions. The matter has gone up to the Apex Court. Learned counsel places reliance on the copy of order dated 6^th December 2013 passed by the Supreme Court in SLP No.19615/2013; order dated 24^th March 2014 passed by Division Bench of this Court in PIL No.67/2013.

¶14

We have perused the aforesaid orders. Prima facie, we are not convinced to entertain this petition as the issue raised has already been addressed in the earlier proceedings. The statutory body of AICTE or Charity Commissioner are empowered to look into such issues. Petition is dismissed.

¶15

Learned counsel for respondent No.10 submits that it is a fifth time petition is dismissed The petitioner is in habit of filing petition and proceedings against the institution without making respondent No.10 aware of the same or without making it party. He, therefore, prays for heavy costs. The issue of imposition of costs would be considered in case the petitioner again resorts to filing of similar petition in future.

¶16

(A.S. GADKARI, J.)

¶17

(NARESH H. PATIL, J.)

¶18

Sanjay Nanoskar, P.S..

Nainesh Suresh Dolas v. the Chairman of Aicte, All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Nainesh Suresh Dolas v. the Chairman of Aicte, All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagwanji Raiyani Vs Maharashtra Met. Region Dev. Authority and Ors.

Shr. Bharat Maruti Lotale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Narayan Rajaram Morajkar Vs Chief Secretary and Ors.

Shri. Narayan Rajaram Morajkar Vs Chief Secretary and Ors.

Indian Council of Investros Vs Union of India and 7 Ors.

Ketan K. Tirodkar Vs Honble Speaker and Ors.

Kalammawadi Dharan Grasth Sanghatna and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

A. B. Thakkar Vs Western Railway and Central Railway Divisional Manager, Indian Railway

Mr. Ganesh Madhukar Patil Vs Superintending Engineer, Ghatghar (Electrical and Mechanical), Circle and Anr.

Kishor Digambar Gaikwad and Ors. Vs Executive Engineer, Irrigation Dept (Local Sector) and Ors.

Manjarde Juni Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd, Manjarde, through Chiarman and Ors. Vs National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, through General Manager and Ors.

Mr. Kunal Nandkumar Pensalwar and Anr. Vs the Principal Secretary, Industry, Energy and Labour Dept and Ors.

The Seva Vikas Co-Operative Bank Limited and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Co-Operation and Anr.

Smt. Kavita Shivaji Nimbalkar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, the General Administration Dept and Ors.