A PIL alleging illegal construction at Gat No.17 in Navli village within an eco-sensitive zone was disposed of by the High Court, which accepted an affidavit from the Sub-Divisional Officer stating that two site inspections found no construction activity or materials.
Nil
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-12.18.odt
1
pmw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.12 OF 2018
Shri. Vinayak Hari Kulkarni … Petitioner
Vs.
Union of India and Ors. … Respondents
Mr. Ranjit D. Shinde for the Petitioner.
Ms. Nisha Mehra, AGP for the Respondent Nos.3 to 6.
CORAM : A.S. OKA &
RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.
DATE : 25th JUNE 2018
P.C.
1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned AGP for the State. The grievance of the petitioner in this PIL is that construction activities have been commenced in the land bearing Gat No.17 situated at village Navli, Taluka Mahabaleshwar, District Satara by unidentified persons. The contention in the petition is that though such illegal activities have been started in eco-sensitive zone, no action is being taken.
2 One Ms. Asmita More, Sub-Divisional Officer, Wai, District Satara, on behalf of the Collector, District Satara has filed an affidavit. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said affidavit, he has stated thus :-
1 of 2
pil-12.18.odt
2
No.17, Village Navali, Tal. Mahabaleshwar, Dist. Satara. I say that the said panchnama also mentions that there was no sign of any construction activity or presence of the construction material at the said site. Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit 'A' is a copy of the Panchnama dated 16th March, 2018 drawn by the Circle Officer, Panchgani and Talathi of Village Navali, Tal. Mahabaleshwar.
3 Paragraph 7 notes that the result of the site visit has been informed to the petitioner by a letter dated 11th May 2018 by sending the same by R.P.A.D.
4 In the petition, the grievance is specifically as regards Gat No.17. We accept the statements made in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the affidavit. In view of the statements, as there is no construction activity found on the said land, it is not necessary to entertain this PIL. Accordingly, PIL is disposed of.
(RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J)
2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to dispose of a PIL alleging illegal construction activities in an eco-sensitive zone after hearing an affidavit confirming no such activity was found on site.
Shri. Vinayak Hari Kulkarni
Union of India
A.S. OKA
RIYAZ I. CHAGLA
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
