Petition challenging a hotel near a flyover in violation of town planning laws was dismissed. The court noted the owner was not a party, it was not a PIL, and the petitioner's grievance was unclear; petitioner was absent.
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.
skn 1/2 9816.15-wp.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 9816 OF 2015
| Sandip Raghunath Patil. | ... | Petitioner. |
|---|---|---|
| V/s. | ||
| National Highways Authority of India | ||
| and others. | ... | Respondents. |
None for the petitioner.
Mrs.M.P.Thakur, AGP for the State.
CORAM : DR.MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. AND M.S.SONAK, J.
DATE : 13th December 2016.
P.C. :
On going through the reliefs sought in this petition, we notice that there is no challenge to the infrastructure project of the highway in question but the grievance of the petitioner seems to be against running of hotel near the flyover by one of the villagers as indicated at Exh.D. We further notice that though there is allegation that violation of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 by the owner of the hotel near Ujalaiwadi Flyover, the owner of the hotel is not made party to this petition and further this petition is not
skn 2/2 9816.15-wp.sxw
filed in the nature of public interest litigation. We fail to understand what the petitioner intends to seek at the hands of this Court.
The petitioner and his advocate are absent. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
(M.S.SONAK, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sandip Raghunath Patil
National Highways Authority of India
DR.MANJULA CHELLUR
M.S.SONAK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
