This PIL concerning alleged sand excavation was disposed of by directing the District Collector, Jalgaon, to decide the petitioners representation on merits within three months after conducting a hearing.
Directed the District Collector, Jalgaon, to decide the representation within three months after affording a reasonable hearing.
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.
( 1 ) pil27.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 27 OF 2016
DEEPAKKUMAR PYARELAL GUPTA VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Mr.S.A.(Tambat) Dhumnal, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.S.B.Yawalkar, AGP for the respondent/State
Mr.U.R.Awate. Advocate h/f Mr.S.B.Talekar, Advocate for
respondent No.7
CORAM : S.S.SHINDE &
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
DATED :06.04.2018
P.C. :-
.This PIL is filed with as many as four
substantive prayers. Learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that time being this Court may
consider the relief in terms of prayer clause-B and may
grant liberty to avail of an appropriate remedy in future
if an occasion arises for the reliefs claimed in terms of
prayer clauses- (B),(C) & (E).
2.The fact that representation filed by the
petitioner on 05.09.2015 to respondent No.2 is not
disputed by the learned AGP appearing for the State and
its Officials. In that view of the matter and since the
petition raises disputed questions of fact, in as much
as, the petitioner is relying upon the panchanama (Exh.G
page No.54 to 54-A), which is placed on record in the
compilation of the writ petition, and learned AGP and
learned counsel appearing for respondent No.7 are relying
upon the letter written by the Sub-Divisional Officer,
Jalgaon Region, Jalgaon addressed to the Tahasildar,
Jalgaon and other two local officials, thereby expressing
different views about alleged excavation of sand by
respondent No.7, over and above permitted by way of
agreement made with contractor, it would be proper to
direct respondent NO.2 to decide the said representation
keeping in view facts as well as law. In that view of the
matter we direct respondent No.2-the District Collector,
Jalgaon, to look into the grievances raised in the
representation filed by the petitioner, and also various
documents on which petitioner, respondent No.7 and other
respondents wish to rely, and after affording an
opportunity of reasonable hearing, decide the said
representation on merits as expeditiously as possible,
however within three months from today. Needless to
observe that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
merits of the contentions raised in this petition and it
is for respondent No.2 to take appropriate decision on
merits.
3.In case decision is adverse to the petitioner or
respondent No.7 as the case may be, aggrieved party will
have liberty to challenge such decision before the
competent forum as provided in law. Needless to observe
that depending upon the outcome of the decision by
respondent No.2, it may be open for the petitioner to
avail of an appropriate remedy, so as to seek relief in
terms of prayer clauses-(B),(C) and (E) in the writ
petition.
4.There is consensus amongst the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner, learned AGP and learned
counsel appearing for respondent No.7, that parties can
appear before respondent No.2, in his Office on
16.04.2018. Accordingly, we direct the parties to appear
before respondent No.2 on 16.04.2018.
5.With the above observations PIL stands disposed
of.
6. Parties to act upon authenticated copy of this order.
7.List for compliance of today’s order/direction
on 16.07.2018 under caption “for compliance”.
8.The petitioner has deposited of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Five Thousand Only) in the Registry of this
Court. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on
instructions, submits that the petitioner is ready to
give Rs.10,000/- to the Legal Aid Committee, Aurangabad.
The Registry to give/divert the amount of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) to the said Committee and remaining
amount of Rs.40,000/- and interest accrued thereupon, if
any, should be returned to the petitioner.
[S.M.GAVHANE,J.] [S.S.SHINDE,J.]
VishalK/ pil27.16
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the District Collector, Jalgaon, should decide the disputed representation regarding alleged sand excavation after affording a reasonable hearing?
Deepakkumar Pyarelal Gupta
State of Maharashtra
District Collector, Jalgaon
Respondent No. 7
S.S. Shinde
S.M. Gavhane
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