Disposed

Subhash Namdev Salunkhe v. State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC19 Dec 2018PIL/192/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a PIL alleging misappropriation of Rs.2Crores in the Midc Village Panchayat Erandoli. The Court granted liberty to file a comprehensive representation to the Chief Officer, Zilla Parishad, Sangli regarding the issue.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a comprehensive representation addressed to Chief Officer, Zilla Parishad, Sangli within 3 weeks for the impugned order on misappropriation.

Subhash Namdev Salunkhe Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

1/3 25pilst 31294.18.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (L)NO.31294 OF 2018

¶4

Subhash Namdev Salunkhe … Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents

¶5

Mr.Nagesh Chavan for the petitioner.

¶6

Ms. Nisha Mehra, AGP for respondents 1, 2 and 6.

¶7

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL, C.J. & M.S.KARNIK, J.

¶8

19th December, 2018.

¶9

P.C.

¶10

The petitioner prays for following substantive reliefs:

¶11

“ (b) (i) To direct the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 to

¶12

made an inquiry about the misappropriation, fraud

¶13

and illegality committed by the Respondent Nos. 6

¶14

to 8, more particularly the Sarpanch, Upsarpanch

¶15

and then the Village Development Officer of the

¶16

Respondent No.7 Village Panchayat Erandoli in

¶17

2/3 25pilst 31294.18.doc

¶18

respect of the various public fund arises under the different head of the Respondent No.7 and also about the grievance raised by the Petitioner.

¶19

(b) To direct the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to take action against the Respondent Nos.6 to 8, more particularly the Sarpanch, Upsarpanch and then the Village Development Officer of the Respondent No.7 Village Panchayat Erandoli, about the grievance raised by the present Petitioner.

¶20

It is submitted that there has been misappropriation in the funds of the Panchayat to the tune of Rs.2Crores. It is submitted that though petitioner has not preferred any representation, the petitioner would rely upon other documents and representations made by villagers. It is submitted that the Extension Officer, Panchayat Samiti has submitted a Final Report to Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, still no action has been taken.

¶21

3/3 25pilst 31294.18.doc

¶22

We have perused the record and considered the submissions

¶23

advanced.

¶24

In our opinion the present PIL can be disposed of by granting the petitioner liberty to file a comprehensive representation addressed to Chief Officer, Zilla Parishad, Sangli in respect of the subject issue. In case such a representation is received within 3 weeks, the Chief Officer would look into this representation and deal with the same in accordance with law.

¶25

Public Interest Litigation stands disposed of.

¶26

M.S.KARNIK, J CHIEF JUSTICE

¶27

L.S. Panjwani, P.S.

Subhash Namdev Salunkhe v. State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Namdev Salunkhe v. State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Rajesh Madhukar Pandit and Ors. Vs the Nashik Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Dinesh Suresh Deore Vs the Union of India and Others

Ramesh Nago Shelar, Shirpur,Dhule Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kisan Patilba Kavad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Maharashtra Krushak Hitwardhak Sanghatna, Jalgaon Vs Union of India and Others

Suresh Vitthal Bakale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ambadas Ramkishan Akulwad Vs the Union of India and Others

Vakil R. Karra Vs State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Home Dept and Ors.

Yashwant Balwant Gaikwad and Ors. Vs the Collector, Sangli and Ors.

Shivram Minerals Thru Sandeep Dongale Vs Mah. Pollution Control Board and Ors.

Bharatesh Construction Co. Thru Paoh Mr. Prakash B Kulkarni Vs Mah. Pollution Control Board and Ors.

Subhash Namdev Salunkhe Vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Mr. Kachru Bhivaji Sonawane Thru Poah Sanjay Kacharu Sonawane Vs State of Maharashtra Thru Secretary, Public Works Dept. and Ors.

Shri. Prashant Pitambar Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.