This PIL challenging illegal land allotment and usage for stadium construction and other commercial purposes was dismissed. The court noted gross delay and found no case made out on merits for granting the claimed injunctions.
The PIL was dismissed for default and on merits due to gross delay.
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.
PIL. 230-13
VPH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 230 OF 2013
Rajendra Vasantrao Chavan & Anr. … Petitioners Vs. Sate of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents
Nonefor the Petitioners.
Mr. Vishal Thadani, AGP for the Respondent – State.
Mr. B. B. Sharma, for Respondent No. 3 – CIDCO.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & Mrs. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : OCTOBER 18, 2016
PC.
dismissed for default once on 22.4.2014. Thereafter it was restored.
By this petition, which is filed as PIL under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Petitioners are seeking following reliefs:
1 / 6
PIL. 230-13
Respondents No. 1 to 4 to -
2 / 6
PIL. 230-13
Corporation to terminate the lease agreement with Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 for using the land for commercial purpose against the terms of Lease Agreement dated 14th May, 2011;
(ii)
direct the Respondent No.4 Municipal Corporation to terminate the Lease Agreement with Respondents No. 8 and 9 for using the land for destruction of flora and fauna of Ramanmala Lake and making irreversible changes in the original and natural status of Ramanmala Lake and thereby causing irreparable loss to the environment and to recover the damage caused to Ramanmala Laka;
(iii)
to direct the Respondent No. 4 to initiate appropriate Civil / Criminal proceedings against the Respondent No. 8 and 9 for using the premises of Water Park for consumption of liquor against the express terms of and conditions of Lease Agreement and the Tender Conditions;
(e) this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass appropriate orders and directions thereby -
3 / 6
PIL. 230-13
(i) directing Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against Respondent No. 5 and 8 to 10 for illegal use of land bearing Survey No. 869 area admeasuring 1.19 acres situated at village Kasaba Bawda, Taluka Karveer, District Kolhapur, for personal gain for raising loans of more than Rs. 14 crores;
(ii) further directing to resume the land either with the government or with the Shri Mangoba Devasthan Trust for illegal use of land and to compensate Shri Mangoba Devasthan Trust for deceiving and depriving them from utilising their land;
(f) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass appropriate orders and directions thereby -
(i) directing the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to resume the land at Survey No. 214 admeasuring 5 hectors 51 acres land situated at Kadamwadi, Kolhapur which was given on lease for the period of 15 years at the annual Rent of Rs. 884/- to the Respondent No. 10 Society as the lease period of 15 years is expired in September,
4 / 6
PIL. 230-13
2006 and for using the land for commercial purposes by setting up private Medical Hospital;
(ii) and further to recover the rent at market rate with interest @ 18% pa from the period of expiry of lease from September, 2006 till the date of resumption of land by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2;
are challenging allotment of land by Respondent No. 3, made in February, 2004. There is a gross delay in filing this PIL. After the land was allotted, a sport stadium has been constructed. The
5 / 6
PIL. 230-13
Petitioners are now seeking injunction restraining Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 from using the said sport stadium. In our view, apart from the delay, no case is made out on merits for grant of reliefs, as claimed by the Petitioners. PIL is, therefore, dismissed.
Sd/Sd/[Mrs. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.]
Vinayak Halemath
6 / 6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether reliefs sought in the PIL regarding illegal land allotment and usage should be granted.
Whether the delay in filing the petition and lack of merit warrants dismissal of the PIL.
Rajendra Vasantrao Chavan & Anr.
State of Maharashtra
CIDCO
Municipal Corporation
Respondent No. 5
Respondent No. 8
V. M. Kanade
Mrs. Swapna S. 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
