Disposed

Pandurang Vithal Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC19 Oct 2015PIL/49/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL concerned the maintenance of roads deteriorated by transport related to a Wind Power project. The High Court directed the B & C Department to execute repairs after preparing plans and estimates, utilizing funds deposited by the Project Developer. Works were ordered to be completed within four months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the B & C Department to execute road repairs within four months using funds deposited by the Project Developer.

Pandurang Vithal Gaikwad Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶2

(1) PIL NO.49/2015

¶3

17 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 49 OF 2015

¶4

PANDURANG VITHAL GAIKWAD VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶5

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr.Bajaj Anil S. AGP for Respondent State: Mr.N.B.Patil Advocate for respondent no.5: Mr.Shelke Shivaji T. Mr.Sawant Amol S., Adv., for R/8.

¶6

CORAM : R. M. BORDE & P.R. BORA, JJ. Dated: October 19, 2015

¶7

PER COURT :-

¶8

The petitioner is praying for issuance of directions to the respondents to maintain following roads:

¶9

(a) Kanhur Pathar - Pimpalgaon Rotha Nandur Pathar - Khandoba Devesthan i.e. ODR -326 and 2. Belhe Kalas-GarkhindiKorthan Khandoba i.e. VR 105, at the earliest.

¶10

The petitioner submits that the roads are being utilized for Wind Power project and as a result of transportation of heavy machinery by the Wind Project Developer, the condition of the roads has deteriorated. The State Government, on 14th July, 2010, has framed a policy in respect of the wind energy project which includes the component of maintenance of the roads. As per the Policy framed by the State Government, which is incorporated in Schedule A to the aforesaid Government Resolution, the expenses for maintenance of the road will have to be borne out of the Green

¶11

agp/-

¶12

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶13

(2) PIL NO.49/2015

¶14

Energy Fund set up under the State Policy. It would be the obligation of the B & C (PWD - State Sector) Department to perform the maintenance work of the roads. It is pointed out that in accordance with the policy formulated by the State, the Project Developer has deposited requisite funds with respondent no.7. The funds lying with respondent no.7 can be utilized for maintaining and repairing the roads.

¶15

In the affidavit in reply presented on behalf of the B & C Department (PWD - State Sector), it is stated that it is the responsibility of the Zilla Parishad to furnish plans and estimate and on receipt of the plans and estimate, the work can be undertaken by the concerned B & C Department (PWD - State Sector). Our attention has been invited to Government Resolution dated 21st August, 2013, which prescribes that it is for the B & C Department (PWD - State Sector) to prepare the cost estimates for undertaking the repair works. It is the contention raised on behalf of the B & C Department (PWD - State Sector) that since the concerned roads are assigned to Zilla Parishad, it is the responsibility of the Zilla Parishad to prepare plans and estimates and furnish the same to B & C Department. However, the contention raised by the B & C Department is not in consonance with the policy framed by the State Government declared in the resolution dated 21st August, 2013.

¶16

agp/-

¶17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶18

(3) PIL NO.49/2015

¶19

In view of the facts stated as above, we direct the respondent B & C Department (PWD - State Sector) to undertake the work of maintenance of the roads after preparing plans and estimates in consonance with the Government Policy declared on 21st August, 2013. There is no impediment on behalf of respondent no.7 to transfer the funds required for maintenance and repairing the roads.

¶20

We direct respondent no.4 to execute the work of repairs / maintenance of the roads. It shall be the obligation of respondent no.7 to provide necessary funds to B & C Department. We expect respondent no.4 to complete the works as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from today.

¶21

With the directions as above, the Public Interest Litigation stands disposed of.

¶22

agp/-

Pandurang Vithal Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pandurang Vithal Gaikwad v. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikas Baburao Patil-Shirgaonkar Vs the State of Maharashtra through Revenue and Forest Dept.and the Principal Secretary Law and Jud.Dp

Courts on Its Own Motion Vs Municipal Council, Karanja Lad, through Its Chief Officer, Karanja Lad

Jalgaon Zilla Adiwasi Malhar Mahadev through Its Chairman Sahebrao Kautik Saindane@Balasaheb Sainda Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Jalgaon Zilla Adiwasi Malhar Mahadev through Its Chairman Sahebrao Kautik Saindane@Balasaheb Sainda Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Miss. Ankita D/O Kamlesh Shah Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept., Mumbai and Other

Janhit Manch and 2 Ors. Vs Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation and 4 Ors.

Shri. Shaikh Tausif Shabbir and Anr. Vs Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Shyam Mansukhrai Agarwal Vs Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation, through Commissioner and Ors.

Atmaram Mango Suryawanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Onther

Prakash Gagandas Basantani and Ors. Vs Saraswati Co-Op Credit Society Ltd. and Anr.

Prakash Gagandas Basantani and Ors. Vs Saraswati Co-Op Credit Society Ltd. and Anr.

Kusumbai Poshetti Kandewad and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ansar Ahmed Ameer Shah Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Apt Packaging Ltd, Aurangabad Vs State of Maharashtra and Others