Disposed

Mayatal Sharad Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC21 Nov 2016PIL/65/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL petition complaining about non-utilization of funds and unauthorized construction was disposed of by directing the petitioner to submit a representation to the Collector, Pune, who must decide within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit a representation to the Collector, Pune within a week; Collector to dispose within three months.

Mayatal Sharad Gaikwad Vs State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

skn 1/2 65.15-pil.sxw

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 65 OF 2015

¶4

Mayatai Sharad Gaikwad. V/s.	...	Petitioner.
State of Maharashtra and others.	...	Respondents.

¶5

M.B.Gawade for the petitioner.

¶6

N.P.Deshmukh, Addl.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and 7 to 10.

¶7

CORAM : DR.MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. AND M.S.SONAK, J. DATE : 21^st November 2016.

¶8

P.C. :

¶9

On going through the contentions raised in this petition and, especially the prayers, we feel that it is a fusion of many things pleaded in the petition by the petitioner. At one stage the petitioner complains about non-utilization of funds of about Rs.55 lakhs meant for backward class and scheduled castes and, on the other hand, she also contends that there is an unauthorized construction which is totally neglected by the authorities. However, who has put the said unauthorized construction; at whose instance; and who is not taking action about this, there is no clear-cut material on record. All

¶10

skn 2/2 65.15-pil.sxw

¶11

contentions raised are vague and prayers are mixed up. However it seems that a representation has been made to the Collector, Pune and it is not attended by the said authority.

¶12

In the above circumstances, we dispose of this petition by directing the petitioner to approach the Collector with a representation indicating the grievances raised in this petition and the Collector concerned shall dispose of the representation by applying his mind to all the grievances raised, within a period of three months from today. The petitioner is directed to submit her representation within a week from today.

¶13

With the aforesaid observation and direction, petition is disposed of.

¶14

(M.S.SONAK, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE

Mayatal Sharad Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayatal Sharad Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vaibhav Vitthalrao Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mohd. Mansoor Mohd. Atik Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Shri. Ramesh Devaram Dharmavat Vs State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Ketan K. Tirodkar Vs State of Maharashtra

Prashant Vyankatrao Hiray Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shri. Dnyneshwar Vishwanath Jadhav and Anr. Vs Nashik Zillha Parishad and Ors.

Mehboob Khan Vs the Collector of Bombay City and Anr.

Nazir Noor Ali Jariya Vs All India Muslim Personal Law Board and Ors.

Mohd. Mansoor Mohd. Atik Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Shri. Ramesh Devaram Dharmavat Vs State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Ketan K. Tirodkar Vs State of Maharashtra

The President - Mahatma Gandhi Tantamukth Gav Samiti Vs Tahsildar, Tal. Shirol and Ors.

Dilip Babaji Ukirde Vs the Collector, Raigad and Ors.

Sports and Physical Education Development Association (Speda), Mumbai Vs the Honble Chief Minister of Maharashtra and Ors.