The Court dismissed a PIL regarding illegal change of user and encroachment on open spaces without entertaining the petition due to the petitioner's absence on the date of final hearing and lack of specific particulars in the prayer clauses.
The petition was disposed of without being entertained; the Civil Application did not survive.
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.
1 pil183-14
sas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.183 OF 2004 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.188 OF 2014
K.Ramchandra Bhat V/s.
The Government of Maharashtra & Ors.
..Petitioner.
..Respondents.
None for the petitioner. Mr. S.N.Patil, AGP for the respondent No.1. Mr.A.A. Garge for the respondent No.3.
CORAM : A.S.OKA AND A.K. MENON, JJ.
DATED : 20TH FEBRUARY, 2015
P.C. :-
2 pil183-14
Development Control Regulations have come into force. In the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner on 13th December, 2005, he has made a grievance about the illegal change of user, even in relation to the some of the premises in the building in which he is residing. As far as prayer (c) is concerned, specific particulars have not been set out in the petition.
(A.K.MENON, J.) (A.S.OKA, J.)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Public Interest Litigation regarding illegal change of user and encroachment on open spaces requires final adjudication in absence of the petitioner.
Whether specific particulars of grievance regarding change of user and specific instances of encroachment must be set out to entertain the PIL.
Whether the Development Control Regulations govern the grievance regarding change of user.
K. Ramchandra Bhat
Government of Maharashtra
Municipal Corporation
A.S. Oka
A.K. Menon
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
