PIL filed alleging illegal felling of trees due to lack of census under the Maharashtra Urban Areas Protection and Preservation of Trees Act. Court dismissed the petition for lack of specific material, reserving liberty to file a fresh petition with particulars.
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
skc
6-PIL-26-14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 26 OF 2014
Shri Prakash P. Kukreja .. Petitioner versus Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation & Anr. .. Respondents
Mr. J. S. Chandnani for Petitioner. Mr. Milind More for Respondent No. 1. Ms S. S. Bhende – AGP for State – Respondent No. 2.
CORAM: DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, C. J. AND M. S. SONAK, J. DATE : 25 NOVEMBER 2016
P.C.:
1] The petitioner, former Law Officer of the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation (UMC) complains about non-implementation of Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act, 1975.
2] Perusal of the averments in the PIL indicates that the petitioner, is not bothered to undertake even preliminary research by himself. Very broadly, the petitioner alleges that there is no census undertaken by UMC and therefore, there is illegal felling of trees.
3] Although, the PIL espouses a good cause concerning protection of ecology, in the absence of proper material or specific instances, we will not be in no position to make any effective orders. The petitioner, is always at liberty to seek information from the UMC with regard to the
1 of 2
skc 2
6-PIL-26-14
census as well as the instances of action under the said Act. Rather than general allegations of this nature, it is expected that the petitioner makes reference to at least some specific instances, so as to enable us to make effective orders in the matter.
4] For the aforesaid reasons, we dispose of the present PIL. We however reserve liberty to the petitioner to do needful in the light of our aforesaid observations and if necessary to institute a fresh petition citing relevant particulars and supported by sufficient material.
5] With liberty as aforesaid, this PIL is disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE
(M. S. SONAK, J.)
chandka
2 of 2
Shri Prakash P. Kukreja
Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation
State
DR. MANJULA CHELLUR
M. S. SONAK
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
