Dismissed

Shri Shankar S/O Ambujhi Khadke v. the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Revenue Department, Mumbai

Bombay HC4 Apr 2018PIL/130/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court rejected a PIL filed by a petitioner alleging illegal conversion of agricultural lands, holding that the petitioner was a 'busybody' with no direct interest since his land was not involved. The PIL was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

PIL rejected; land conversion allegations not entertained due to lack of petitioner's interest.

Shri Shankar S/O Ambujhi Khadke Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

0404pil130.17

¶2

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

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.130 OF 2017

¶4

(Shri Shankar s/o Ambuji Khadke vs. The State of Maharashtra and others) ______________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶5

Shri G.G. Bade, Advocate for petitioner.

¶6

Shri D.P. Thakare, Additional Government Pleader for respondent nos.1 to 6.

¶7

Shri A. Parchure, Advocate for respondent no.7. Shri S.S. Meshram, Advocate for respondent nos.8 and 9.

¶8

CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND M.G. GIRATKAR, JJ. DATED : APRIL 4, 2018

¶9

The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that the lands, which were alloted to agriculturists, were illegally converted from Class II to Class I and for further direction to return the said lands to their original owners.

¶10

To a specific query as to whether the issue also involves the petitioner's land or not, Shri Bade, learned Counsel for petitioner, fairly concedes that petitioner's land is not involved in the issue.

¶11

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S.P. Gupta vs. Union of India (1981 (Supp) SCC 87) has diluted the issue of locus standi and held that public interest litigation at the behest of persons, who for variety of reasons are not in a position to approach the Court , would be tenable at the instance of third party.

¶12

0404pil130.17

¶13

2/2

¶14

However, If any of the land owners is of the view that his land is illegally converted and he is entitled to get the land restored to him, he is not precluded from approaching the competent Court for taking such relief. We, therefore, find that the present public interest litigation at the instance of busybody would not be tenable. The public interest litigation is, therefore, rejected. Needless to say that interim order, if any, stands vacated.

¶15

JUDGE JUDGE

¶16

khj

Shri Shankar S/O Ambujhi Khadke v. the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Revenue Department, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Shankar S/O Ambujhi Khadke v. the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Revenue Department, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Riyaz Usman Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kiran Sukhdeo Dhepe Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ranjeet S/O Dattatray Harne and Another Vs the State of Mah., Thr. Its Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairy Development and 1

Shri Rahul S/O Madhukar Deshmukh Vs Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi and 2 Othe

Vaishali Deepak Bafna Vs State of Maharashtra, through School Education Dept and Ors.

Vikas Prakash Yedake Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Deepakkumar Pyarelal Gupta Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vaishali Karbhari Jadhav and Others Vs the Union of India and Others

Madan S/O Jagobaji Welekar and 2 Others Vs State of Maharahstra, through Its Secretary, Ministry of Revenue and 2 Others

Namdeo S/O. Sitaram Parate Vs State of Maharashtra Ministry of Home Mantralaya Mumbai Thr. Sect. and Others

Kiran S/O. Chainraj Hasoriya and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Officer Sadar Nagpur and Another

Smt. Meerabai Durgadasji Agrawal and Another Vs Shri. Ajay Kurwade, the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Buldhana and Another

Smt. Rajani Sureshrao Kosurkar and Another Vs Dadaji Dagdu Bhuse, State of Minister of Rural Development, Mumbai

Anandilal Hajarimal Bhulada and Another Vs the Shegaon Municipal Council Thru. Its Chief Officer