Disposed

Rajesh S/O Mahadeo Gajghate v. the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra, Mumbai and 4 Others

Bombay HC10 Apr 2015PIL/82/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition sought directions to constitute eight additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunals at Nagpur due to case pendency. The court rejected the plea as the affidavit did not establish overburdening or the need for eight new tribunals at this stage, noting that other cities have fewer working tribunals.

What did the court decide?

no order as to costs

Rajesh S/O Mahadeo Gajghate Vs the Chief… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

1 PIL82.14.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.82 OF 2014

¶4

[Rajesh s/o Mahadeo Gajghate .vs. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra, Mumbai and others]

¶5

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶6

- - - - None for the petitioner, Mrs. B.H. Dangre, Government Pleader for the respondent nos.1 to 4, Shri Kukday, counsel for the respondent no.5.

¶7

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.M. BADAR, JJ.

¶8

DATED : APRIL 10, 2015.

¶9

By this petition which is registered as a Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to constitute eight more additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunals at Nagpur.

¶10

It is stated that two, out of the four, Motor Accident Claims Tribunals do not have a Presiding Officer and only two are working. It is stated that considering the pendency of the cases in the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals at Nagpur, constitution of eight more additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunals at Nagpur is necessary.

¶11

The respondent nos.1, 3 and 4 have filed the affidavit-inreply of the Deputy Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, Home (Transport) Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. It is stated in the affidavit-in-reply that in Mumbai eight Motor Accident Claims Tribunals are established, whereas in Nagpur there are four. It is stated that only one Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is established in Thane and in Pune. According to the respondent nos.1, 3 and 4, the pendency of the cases in the Nagpur Tribunal is of around 6000 cases. It is stated that two Tribunals in Nagpur, which were not functioning due to absence of the Presiding Officer, are made functional as a Notification in that regard has been issued on 22.12.2014. It is stated

¶12

2 PIL82.14.odt

¶13

that presently all four Tribunals are functioning.

¶14

We do not find, on a reading of the affidavit-in-reply, that the four Tribunals in Nagpur are overburdened and that there is a need to set up eight additional Tribunals in Nagpur, at this stage, as in Pune and Thane, only one Motor Accident Claim Tribunal is working.

¶15

In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the Public Interest Litigation with no order as to costs.

¶16

JUDGE

¶17

JUDGE

¶18

Gulande

Rajesh S/O Mahadeo Gajghate v. the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra, Mumbai and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh S/O Mahadeo Gajghate v. the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra, Mumbai and 4 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

Joshi Shivshankar Jatashankar Vs the Chief Secretary Govt. of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Sarangsing S/O Shivdassing Chavhan and Another Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Chief Secretary, Mumbai and 3 Others

Kishor S/O Motilal Kapoor Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Chief Secretary, Water Supply and Sanitation Department and Others

Arvind Jagannath Joshi Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Court on Its Own Motion Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of General Administration, Mumbai and 5 Oth

Murlidhar S/O Namdeorao Nakade Vs State of Mah., through Principal Secretary, Village Development and Water Conservation Deptt. and 2

Omprakash S/O Shankarlalji Joshi Vs School Education Department, through Its Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Yograj Harideo Jarad and Others Vs Union of India, through Its Secretary, Ministry of Power, New Delhi and Others

Usha Mahadeorao Wankhede Vs State of Mah., Department of Home Guard and Civil Defense Mah. State, Thr. Its Senior Administrativ

Shri Sunil S/O Shriram Sadbhayya Vs the Government of Maharashtra, Department of Home through Its Secretary, Mumbai and Others

IC-45770Y Brig Dinesh Kumar Ahluwalia Vs Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi and Anothers

Prakash S/O Chandan Khandekar Vs Union of India Thr. Secty., Minstry of Human Resource Devp. Dept. of School Edn and Literacy and 6

Farhan Khan S/O Hasan Khan Vs State of Maharashtra, through the Collector and 5 Others

Rajesh Ramkrishna Chaturvedi Vs Smt. Sandhya W/O Rajesh Chaturvedi