In this PIL, the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to inspect records regarding a building in Mumbai and to remove unauthorized constructions. The court found no public interest involved due to the petitioner's history of filing frivolous petitions and disposed of the application.
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.
PIL. 94-14
VPH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 94 OF 2014
Nityanand Harnarayan Mishra … Petitioner Vs. Municipal Commissioner, Brihan Mumbai Mahanagar Palika & Ors. … Respondents
Ms. Nisha Mehra, for the Petitioner. Ms. Trupti Puranik, for the Respondent – BMC. Mr. Sanjiv Sawant, for Respondent No. 4.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & Mrs. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : OCTOBER 18, 2016
PC.
Petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 4. By this petition, which is filed as PIL, Petitioner is seeking following reliefs:
“This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and order / direction / declaration:
1 / 4
PIL. 94-14
2 / 4
PIL. 94-14
of such illegal act be fixed of Respondents and they be penalized for their illegal acts.
unauthorised construction made by Respondent No. 4. Admittedly, Respondent No. 4 is owner of the building which is now being repaired. Respondent No. 4 has filed a detailed affidavit in reply, stating therein that there is a civil suit pending in the City Civil Court filed by him, and an appeal from order challenging the order of the City Civil Court at Bombay was disposed of by this Court by an order dated 29.7.2015. It is submitted that Petitioner is in habit of filing false and frivolous PILs only for the purpose of harassing and blackmailing the developers. He has given a list cases filed by the Petitioner. It is submitted that this Court was pleased to dismiss PIL (L) No. 55/2016 since no instructions were given to the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner.
3 / 4
PIL. 94-14
frivolous petitions / PILs, making similar allegations in respect of other buildings. Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain this PIL. Reserving the right of any aggrieved person from approaching the appropriate forum, PIL is disposed of.
Sd/Sd/[Mrs. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.]
Vinayak Halemath
4 / 4
Nityanand Harnarayan Mishra
Municipal Commissioner, Brihan Mumbai Mahanagar Palika
V. M. Kanade
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
