Disposed

Chandrashekhar Kachruji Sarode v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC28 Sept 2015PIL/61/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of PIL alleging default in Bharat Nirman Water Supply Scheme. Authorities recovered a balance amount from committee office-bearers, substantially redressing the grievance while directing them to act against renegades.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of the PIL. Directed respondents to take appropriate action against respondents 5 and 6 regarding their lapses.

Chandrashekhar Kachruji Sarode Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

pil61.15.doc

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 61 OF 2015

¶5

Chandrashekhar s/o Kachruji Sarode .. PETITIONER

¶6

VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS

¶7

Mr. K.B. Jadhav, advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.B. Patil, AGP for the State. Mr. A.D. Aghav, advocate for respondents 4, 7 and 8. Mr. V.C. Patil, advocate for respondent 5 and 6.

¶8

=====

¶9

CORAM : R.M. BORDE & V. K. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : 28^TH SEPTEMBER, 2015.

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

Petitioner is praying for issuance of directions to respondents to recover amount of Rs. 2,86,571/- as has been assessed by the Accounts Officer.

¶12

It is the contention of petitioner that respondents 5 and 6 who were the office bearers of the Committee have committed default in completing water supply work under the Bharat Nirman Water Supply Scheme for village Dawarwadi and, the amount quoted above is recoverable from the Committee. It is the contention of petitioner that an enquiry was conducted in respect of the deficiencies in the work carried out by the Committee and, the enquiry officer has determined the amount recoverable.

¶13

Affidavit-in-reply has been presented on behalf of respondents 4, 7

¶14

pil61.15.doc

¶15

¶16

and 8 by the Executive Engineer (Water Supply), Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad wherein it has been pointed out that out of the recoverable amount of Rs. 2,86,571/-, the Committee has later on carried out work in respect of approach road and switch room which is valued at Rs. 1,46,367/-. The balance amount of Rs. 1,40,204/- has been recovered from respondents 5 and 6. It does appear that respondents 4, 7 and 8 have adopted proper course and enforced recovery of amount due from respondents 5 and 6. In view of the action taken by the concerned respondents as against respondents 5 and 6, the grievance raised by petitioner in the instant petition has been substantially redressed.

¶17

In view of reasons recorded above, P.I.L. stands disposed of. It would be open for the concerned respondents to take appropriate action against respondents 5 and 6, including prohibiting them from continuing as office bearers of the Committee, in view of lapses allegedly committed by them and, we direct respondents to take appropriate action against concerned individuals expeditiously.

¶18

dyb

Chandrashekhar Kachruji Sarode v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrashekhar Kachruji Sarode v. the 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Harendra S/O. Hansraj Ved Vs the Union of India, through the Ministry of Civil Aviation, New Delhi and Others

Chetan Kothari Vs Union of India, Th. Secretary,Govt. of India and 3 Ors.

Altaf Ahmed Iqbal Ahmed Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Gram Panchayat, Mamurabad Thr. Its Sarpanch Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sunil Mukund Thatte Vs Union of India and Others

Yogesh Madhukar Ghode and Ors. Vs Nashik Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Jan Adalat through Mr. Shaikh Ibrahim Abdul and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Anr.

Arun Ganesh Deo Vs the State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Dilip Narayan Chaudhari and Others Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Gram Panchayat, Mamurabad Thr. Its Sarpanch Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shankar Sonu Bharambe and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Prakash Narayanrao Rathod Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bharat Maruti Adawale Vs the Union of India and Others

Datta Eknath Dhamne Vs the State of Mah and Ors.