Partly allowed

National Cons. Environment and Forest Prot. Forum Thr. President, Manishsingh M. Chauhan v. the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Environmental and Forest Dept. Mumbai and Other

Bombay HC23 Aug 2017CAO/1150/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PIL challenging forest encroachments on government and municipal lands. Court directs petitioner to submit site-specific representations to competent authorities and orders removal of admitted encroachments within the disallowed categories. The matter is disposed of. Rel:judgment

What did the court decide?

Direct Grant: Zilla Parishad to initiate removal action for 47 admitted encroachments; Petitioner to submit site-specific representations to competent authorities; Authorities to decide within 4 weeks

National Cons. Environment and Forest Prot… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

23.8PIL.151.16

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 151 OF 2016. (National Consumer Environment and Forest Protection Forum .vs. State of Maharashtra & others)

¶5

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶6

Mr. M.K. Kulkarni, Advocate for petitioner, Mr. K.L. Dharmadhikari, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 & 2. Mr. M.A. Sable, Advocate for respondent no.3, Mr. J.B. Kasat, Advocate for respondent no.4.

¶7

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ. DATED : AUGUST 23, 2017.

¶8

Petitioner – a Trust functioning in area at forest protection with ISO 14001 certificate attempts to demonstrate encroachments in various areas under Nagpur Zilla Parishad, Nagpur Municipal Corporation and also on lands of State Government.

¶9

Though specific details of any particular site are not appearing, respondent no.3 Zilla Parishad has placed on record a list as Annexure R-3A wherein about 62 encroachments on its properties in entire district are shown.

¶10

After hearing respective Counsel, as we do not see any malafides on part of petitioner, we grant petitioner leave to make appropriate representation for removal of encroachment to respondent no.2 Collector, etc.

¶11

The representation shall be site specific giving necessary details. If the site vests in State Government, representation shall be given to respondent no.2 Collector. If the encroachment is on

¶12

23.8PIL.151.16

¶13

¶14

area in jurisdiction of respondent no.4 Nagpur Municipal Corporation, representation shall be addressed to Municipal Commissioner. If it is within area of Zilla Parishad, representation shall be addressed to its Chief Executive Officer.

¶15

In so far as 47 sites on which encroachment is admitted by Zilla Parishad, we direct respondent no.3 to initiate necessary action for removal of those encroachments. Necessary assistance shall be rendered by respondent nos. 5 and 6 Gram Panchayat, its officers and office bearers.

¶16

If any police assistance is sought for by any of these authorities for removal of encroachment, the police department shall extend the same immediately.

¶17

If the representation is made by petitioner as mentioned supra, the concerned authorities shall take suitable decision upon it within four weeks after its receipt. If action for removal of encroachment is felt necessary, the same shall be initiated within next four weeks as per law.

¶18

With these directions, we partly allow the P.I.L. and dispose it of.

¶19

Civil Application, i.e. C.A.O. No. 1150/17 also stands disposed of.

¶20

Judge

¶21

Judge

¶22

National Cons. Environment and Forest Prot. Forum Thr. President, Manishsingh M. Chauhan v. the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Environmental and Forest Dept. Mumbai and Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Cons. Environment and Forest Prot. Forum Thr. President, Manishsingh M. Chauhan v. the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Environmental and Forest Dept. Mumbai and Other

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

Shri. Jagadamba Mahavidyalaya Art, Com. and Science Achalpur, Thr Principal and Anr. Vs Shobhanath Kahsiprasad Dubey and Others

Maulana Azad Minority Education and Welfare Society Isoli Chikhli Buldhana Thr. Secretary Vs State of Maharashtra Dept. of School Education and Sports Mumbai Thr. Secretary and Others

Sarvesh S/O Rajesh Waghmare Vs District Caste Cert. Scrutiny Commi., Nagpur Thr. Deputy Director and Member Secretary and Another

Courts on Its Own Motion Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Urban Development Detprtment Mantralaya, Mumbai and Other

Vitthal S/O. Mahadeorao Gawande Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Forest and Revenue Dept. and Others

Bharatram Mahadeorao Dhurve Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Wardha and Others