In a PIL regarding alleged unauthorized construction, the two-judge bench held that unauthorized construction cases cannot be dealt with as PILs and disposed of the petition without entertaining it as such.
The PIL was disposed of without entertaining it as a Public Interest Litigation.
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.
spb/
17pil181-15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 181 OF 2015
Shabbir Yar Khan & 2 others. … Petitioners.
V/s.
Shri Pramod Naralkar & Anr. … Respondents.
Mr. Nitesh Bhutekar a/w. Vijay Dighe, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Mankirat Singh h/for Sujay Gangal, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE AND MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI,JJ.
DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2016 P.C. :
1 The Petitioners, who claim to be social workers, have filed this Public Interest Litigation, seeking following reliefs :
a. Be pleased to call the record and proceedings from the respondent no.2 in respect with the DRC issued by the respondent no.2 and be pleased to pass and order declaring the DRC as illegal document which could not be utilized by the respondent no.1.
1/2
Borey
spb/
17pil181-15.odt
b. Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to demolish the area of 400 sq. mtrs. consumed by the respondent no.1 which could not be utilized for construction.
c. Be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 to fix the responsibility on their employees, and architect and to take necessary action against them. d. ….. …..
e. …. …..
2 In para 1 of the Petition, the Petitioners have stated that several illegalities have been committed by the Respondent by constructing the building on CTS No. 97/1. In our view each and every case of alleged unauthorized construction cannot be agitated before this court as a PIL. We are, therefore, not inclined to entertain this petition as PIL However, we reserve the right of the Petitioners to approach appropriate forum.
3 The PIL is disposed of.
(MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI,J.) (V. M. KANADE,J.)
2/2
Borey
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the case of alleged unauthorized construction can be agitated before the court as a Public Interest Litigation.
Shabbir Yar Khan
Others
Pramod Naralkar
Representative Respondent
V. M. KANADE
SWAPNA JOSHI
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
