Disposed

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

Bombay HC21 Nov 2016PIL/79/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PIL challenging brick manufacturing via riverbed soil excavation by 6th to 15th respondents. Court directed 1st Respondent Tahasildar to investigate and stop activities within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed Tahasildar to inquire and stop illegal brick manufacturing activities within two months with Police assistance if necessary.

The President - Mahatma Gandhi Tantamukth Gav Samiti… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

skn 1/2 79.15-pil.sxw

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 79 OF 2015

¶4

The President, Mahatma Gandhi Tantamukth Gav Samiti, Umalwad, Shirol. ... Petitioner. V/s. Tahasildar, Tal.Shirol, Dist. Kolhapur & others. ... Respondents.

¶5

Prashant Syryawanshi i/b. G.M.Savagave for the petitioner. Ms.S.S.Bhende, AGP for respondent Nos.1 to 5. Kedar Patil for respondent Nos.7 to 12 and 14 and 15.

¶6

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

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

The petitioner's grievance is that sixth respondent is encouraging respondent Nos.7 to 15 in their manufacturing of bricks by excavating red soil from the beds of river Krishna. According to the petitioner, by allowing respondent Nos.7 to 15 to indulge in such activities, the banks of the river will erode and destroy ecological balance of the area in question. According to the petitioner, this has led to various disputes within the village between the residents of the village and all this is on account of indifferent attitude of sixth

¶9

skn 2/2 79.15-pil.sxw

¶10

respondent, the Sarpanch of Grampanchayat, Umalwad, TalukaShirol, District- Kolhapur.

¶11

The learned A.G.P. appearing for the State submits that as on today there is no activity of brick manufacturing by excavating red soil from the beds of river Krishna, Umalwad. However, we are of the opinion that the first respondent- Tahasildar to make a discrete inquiry into the matter through his officers.

¶12

We, therefore, direct first respondent- Tahasildar, TalukaShirol, District- Kolhapur to treat this petition as representation and dispose it of within two months today and, if the illegal activities of manufacturing of bricks as contended in the petition are still persisting, he shall forthwith take all the steps including assistance of Police, if necessary, to stop the said activities.

¶13

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

¶14

(M.S.SONAK, J.)

¶15

CHIEF JUSTICE

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

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

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.

Sharukh F.Erani Vs the Commissioner State Excise and Anr.