The High Court found that the delay in discussing senior citizen welfare measures on the main agenda was due to urgency, requiring a supplementary agenda. It held there was no illegality in the Standing Committee's decisions. The PIL was dismissed and the tagged writ petition disposed of.
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.
1/2
PIL 239 of 2014
Vat
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 239 OF 2014
Vikrant Chandrahas Tawde ….Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ….Respondents
WITH WRIT PETITION No. 1046 OF 2015
Sanjay Pandurang Ghadigaonkar ...Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Kishor Ptil for Petitioner Ms. Aparna Vhatkar -AGP for Respondent -State Mr.Ajit Ram Pitale for Respondent No.2
CORAM : V. M. KANADE &
SMT. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, JJ
DATE : SEPTEMBER 21, 2016
P.C. :
passed by the Standing Committed without bringing the subject mentioned in the main agenda.
2/2 PIL 239 of 2014
urgency, the matter has to be taken on the supplementary urgent agenda. We, therefore, find that pending decisions have to be taken for construction of toilets, roads etc. for the benefit of the senior citizens and, therefore, the said subject was taken on the supplementary agenda. We do not see any illegality committed by the Standing Committee in passing the said resolutions. We are, therefore, not inclined to entertain this PIL. Hence, PIL is dismissed. Writ petition No. 1046 of 2015, tagged along with PIL, does not survive and is accordingly disposed of.
SWAPNA S. JOSHI, J. V.M. KANADE, J.
Vaishali Tikam
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Standing Committee committed illegality in passing resolutions without bringing a legislative matter to the main agenda due to its urgency.
Whether the High Court should entertain the PIL regarding the construction of toilets and roads for senior citizens.
Vikrant Chandrahas Tawde
Sanjay Pandurang Ghadigaonkar
The State of Maharashtra
V. M. Kanade
Smt. 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
