Disposed

Shri Shrikant Jetyappa Bansode v. State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC17 Mar 2017PIL/105/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged a survey to identify unauthorized constructions, including religious structures, on public property. The court disposed of the PIL without expressing an opinion on merits, noting further action would depend on specific violations.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of without any expression of opinion on the merits.

Shri Shrikant Jetyappa Bansode Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

1/2 (16)PIL-105-16

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATINO NO. 105 OF 2016

¶4

Shri Shrikant Jetyappa Bansode .. Petitioner V/s

¶5

The State of Maharashtra & ors .. Respondents

¶6

Mr.Machhindra Patil, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Samir Kumbhakoni, Advocate for respondent no.3. Mr.A.B. Vagyani, G.P with Mrs.M.P. Thakur, AGP for the State.

¶7

CORAM: DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, CJ. & G.S. KULKARNI, J.

¶8

DATED: 17^th MARCH, 2017

¶9

P.C.:-

¶10

1 Petitioner is before this Court aggrieved by the exercise undertaken by the respondent authorities in conducting a survey to ascertain the unauthorized constructions encroachments, including religious and charitable structures if they are put up on the public property. This was in pursuance of government resolution dated 5^th May 2011 which is revived from time to time. The last such resolution seems to be dated 29^th October 2016. According to the petitioner, third respondent seems to have issued notice to private temple owners to show cause why the unauthorized structure should not be demolished.

¶11

Tilak

¶12

2/2 (16)PIL-105-16

¶13

2 In response to the above petition, now the State Government and the respondent no.3 corporation are before us contending that for the present, the drive is only to see whether any illegal construction on the public properties including the religious and the like buildings are put up on public properties and what action should be taken in terms of direction of Apex Court in

¶14

Union of India Vs. State of Gujarat & ors (SLP Civil) no.8519/2006 dated 29^th September 2009. It is needless to say that if anyone has violated the building norms or procedure or regulations applicable for the construction even on a a private land, comes to the knowledge of the authorities, they are always at liberty to take action strictly in accordance with the procedure including principles of natural justice.

¶15

3 With these observations, PIL is disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits of the petitioner.

¶16

(G.S.KULKARNI, J) (CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶17

Tilak

Shri Shrikant Jetyappa Bansode v. State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Shrikant Jetyappa Bansode v. State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nilesh Mahendra Jamkar Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Education Dept. Mantralaya Mumbai and Others

Mr. Keval Ukey Vs the Chief Justice, Bombay High Court and Ors.

Shri. Vijay Vedpal Piwal Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Janseva Vikas Samiti Vs the Collector of Bombay Suburban Mumbai Suburban District and 6 Ors.

Shri Gautam Baburao Maske and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vitthal Annarao Hajgude and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shaikh Sameer Rashid and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Aam Aadmi Lok Manch through Its President Shri. P.P. Goyal Vs Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Shri. Santosh Babu Neharkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Razzaq Hussain Pathan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Smt. Vimlabai Sitaram Neharkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Yasmin E. Tavaria Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Sachin Anil Choughule and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri Shrikant Jetyappa Bansode Vs State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary and Ors.