Dismissed

Raju Ramdas Mankar Organizing Member of Vidharba Khandesh Matang Seva Singh v. the Secretary, Covernment of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC19 Aug 2016PIL/72/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL filed under Article 226, the petitioner sought directions for the release of budgetary funds to a corporate body for the Matang Community. The Court held that a blanket PIL order for fund disbursement is impermissible and noted that aggrieved individuals should approach the Court with specific grievances.

What the court decided

AI extract

Raju Ramdas Mankar Organizing Member of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

PILL. 10-16

¶2

VPH

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (L) No. 10 OF 2016

¶5

Raju Ramdas Mankar Organizing Member of Vidarba Khandesh Matang Seva Sangh … Petitioner Vs. The Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents

¶6

¶7

Mr. Vijay M. Emul, for the Petitioner. Mr. S. K. Chaurasiya i/b Raj & Associates, for the Respondent.

¶8

¶9

CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & Smt. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 19, 2016 PC.

¶10

By this PIL, which is filed under Article 226 of the

¶11

Constitution of India, the Petitioner is seeking following reliefs:

¶12

(a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for relevant records pertaining to the budgetary provision / allocation of funds by Respondent No. 1 during the financial year commencing from 1^st April 2015 to 31^st March 2016 made in connection with the

¶13

1 / 3

¶14

PILL. 10-16

¶15

Mahamandal/ Corporation known as Sahityaratna Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe Vikas Mahamandal (Regd.) Mumbai and after perusing the said records directions be given to the Respondent to release the funds to the said Corporation for onwards disbursement to various applicants of Matang Community;

¶16

(b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue directions to the Respondents for appointment of Chairman and Non-administrative members in the corporation known as Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe Development Corporation (Ltd) Mumbai under the control of social justice and special aid cell that is Respondent No. 1 herein.

¶17

(c) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue directions to the Respondents to carry forward the funds allocated but not released during the financial year 2015-2016 to be included in the next financial year 2016-2017 and the said funds may be added in the budgetary provision of funds of 2016-2017 pertaining to Lokshahir Anna Bahu Sathe Vikas Mandal (Ltd.) Mumbai

¶18

(d) Such other and further reliefs as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper be kindly granted.”

¶19

2 / 3

¶20

PILL. 10-16

¶21

The persons who are aggrieved on account of non disbursement of budgetary allocation of funds of Respondent No. 1 during the financial year commencing from 1^st April, 2015 to 31^st March, 2016 can approach this Court, seeking the reliefs which are claimed by the Petitioner. The PIL seeking a blanket order for disbursement of funds by Respondent No. 1, therefore, cannot be issued by this Court while exercising our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Reserving the said right of such aggrieved persons, the PIL is disposed of.

¶22

Sd/Sd/[Smt. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.]

¶23

Vinayak Halemath

¶24

3 / 3

Raju Ramdas Mankar Organizing Member of Vidharba Khandesh Matang Seva Singh v. the Secretary, Covernment of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Raju Ramdas Mankar Organizing Member of Vidharba Khandesh Matang Seva Singh v. the Secretary, Covernment of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gajanan Nilkanthrao Kuleriya Vs the Collector, Yavatnal and Others

Sunil S/O Gajanan Maiskar Vs Union of India through Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Dept. and 4 Others

Jaikrushna S/O. Shriram Fendarkar Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Higher and Technical Education Dept. Mantralaya, Mumbai and Oth

Sh. Rajiv S/O Prakash Kakkad Vs Union of India Ministry of Environment and Forest through Its Director and Others

Smita Ramesh Gaikwad Vs Afzal Supariwala and 3 Ors.

Mr. Asad Ashraf Patel Vs State of Maharashtra and 6 Ors.

Lawrence Chettiar Vs Government of Maharashtra,(through Govt. Pleader)

Disha Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 4 Ors.

Nilesh Ramchandra Dahanukar Vs State of Maharashtra through Housing Department and 13 Ors.

Sachin Manohar Bandkar Vs State of Maharashtra and 2 Other

Indian Overses Bank Vs Mr. Abhay Raghunath Bhatwadekar and Ors.

Shri. Mallappa Chanappa Chougale and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Adv. Amit Kisanrao Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra through Govt. Pleader and Ors.

Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited Vs M/S. Alpha and Omega Diagnostics (India) Ltd. and 7 Ors.