Dismissed

Ashokappa S/O. Narayanappa Iregaonkar v. the State of Maha., Dept. of Rural Water Supply, through Its Principal Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Bombay HC7 Jul 2016PIL/101/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL regarding alleged misappropriation and improper execution of public work in Hivra Sable village, the court reviewed an enquiry report confirming completion of actual work with good quality and dismissed the petition as unmerited.

What did the court decide?

The petition alleging misappropriation and improper work was dismissed.

Ashokappa S/O. Narayanappa Iregaonkar Vs the… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

PIL101-15.odt

¶3

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

¶4

Public Interest Litigation No.101/2015 (Ashokappa Narayanappa Iregaonkar .vs. The State of Maharashtra and others.)

¶5

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

¶6

Mr. A.S. Chakotkar, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. N.B. Jawade, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Mrs. M.P. Munshi, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Mr. P.K. Raulkar, Advocate for Respondent No.7. Mr. N.B. Kalwaghe, Advocate for Respondent No.8.

¶7

CORAM : B.R. Gavai & V.M. Deshpande, JJ. DATED : July 07,2016.

¶8

The petition was filed alleging therein that the work carried out by respondent no.8 was not proper and that there was a misappropriation with regard to the said work.

¶9

We had, therefore, vide order dated 23.03.2016 directed respondent no.3 to conduct an enquiry about the amount of withdrawals that have been made by respondent no.8 and the actual amount spent on implementation of the scheme.

¶10

In pursuance to the directions issued by this Court, an enquiry report is submitted along with the pursis dated 23.06.2016. The perusal of the report would reveal that an amount of Rs.51,87,000/- was received for the said work. It has been further found that the actual work which was executed is to the tune of Rs.63,76,350/-. It has been further found that as a matter of fact though the work is complete, an amount of Rs. 11,89,000/- was yet to be paid. It has been

¶11

¶12

PIL101-15.odt

¶13

further found that the quality of the work is also good. 4. The report further states that when the Enquiry Officer held discussion with the villagers, he was informed that in the last 10 to 12 years in Hivra Sable village there is shortage of water from the month of January itself and from March onwards the water is required to be supplied by tanker. It has been further found that if the work was not stalled, the water supply from the said scheme would have commenced in the present year itself.

¶14

In that view of the matter, we find that the allegation made in the petition is without substance. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

¶15

JUDGE

¶16

JUDGE

¶17

halwai

Ashokappa S/O. Narayanappa Iregaonkar v. the State of Maha., Dept. of Rural Water Supply, through Its Principal Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashokappa S/O. Narayanappa Iregaonkar v. the State of Maha., Dept. of Rural Water Supply, through Its Principal Secretary, Mumbai 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

Jayshree Ramakant Khadilkar-Pande Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 7 Ors.

Bombay Lawyers Association Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Mr. Shriprakash Neel Vs the State of Maharashtra through Dept. of Land Revenue and Ors.

Mr. Santosh Digambar Honkarape and Anr. Vs the Central Adoption Resource Agency and Ors.

Shri Anwar Chandan Jamadar vs Kolhapur District Central Co.Op. Bank Ltd. through Its Chairman and Anr.

Aam Aadmi Lok Manch through Its President Shri. P. P. Goyal Vs State of Maharashtra through the Provincial Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Pune

Mr. Hemant Baburao Patil Vs Union of India through Solicitor General of India and Ors.

Kunal S/O Nitin Raut Vs the State of Maharashtra Dept. of Technical Education Thr. Secretary Mumbai and Others

Ganesh S/O Bhojram Parate Vs State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Nandanwan, Nagpur and Others

Ganpat Barkuji Parteki (in Jail) Vs the State of Mahrashtra through Deputy Inspector General of Police (Prison), East Division Nagpur

Anandrao Kisan Gedam Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Home Department, Mumbai and Others

Mr. Gajanan S/O. Sanjay Charde Vs State of Maha., through Its Secretary, Dept. of Public Work, and Others

Naresh S/O Laxminarayan Bhutada Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. P.S.O. P.S. Akot Gramin, Akola and Another

Chetan S/O Mahesh Joshi Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. P.S.O. P.S. Akot Gramin, Akola and Another