The court directed the State Government to decide a representation regarding the appointment of an administrator for Ahmednagar Municipal Corporation within three months before disposing of the PIL.
Direction to respondent no.2 to decide the petitioner's representation appointing an administrator within three months.
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.
48.18PIL
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.48 OF 2018
Suhas s/o. Chintaman Mulay .. PETEITIONER
VERSUS
1. The Union of India, Through Ministry of Urban Development, New Delhi.
2. The State of Maharashtra Through its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
3. The Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar Through its Commissioner, Ahmednagar.
4. The Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar, Dist. Ahmednagar. ..RESPONDENTS
...
Mr.Sandip R. Andhale, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.A.B.Girase, PP for the respondent/State
Mr.D.G.Nagode, ASG for respondent no.1.
Mr.S.V.Dixit, Advoate for respondent no.4.
...CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND
V.K.JADHAV, JJ.
DATE : 23.07.2018
48.18PIL
2
ORDER:
1]Pursuant to the notices issued to the
respondents, respondent No.3 - Corporation has
filed reply.
2]Learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that in case the State
Governmentisdirectedtodecidethe
representation filed by the petitioner, praying
therein to appoint an Administrator to look after
the affairs of respondent No.3 – Corporation, the
petitioner is satisfied.
3]In the light of above, we direct
respondent no.2 to decide the representation filed
by the petitioner, if already not decided, on its
own merits, keeping in view the relevant procedure
and Rules, as expeditiously as possible, however,
within three months from today. The Petition
stands disposed of.
4]However, we make it clear that we have
not entered upon the merits of the contentions
48.18PIL
3
raised in the Petition or in the reply filed by
respondent No.3, and it is for respondent no.2 to
take appropriate decision, in accordance with law,
on the representation of the petitioner.
5]The parties to act upon authenticated
copy of this order.
[V.K.JADHAV] [S.S.SHINDE]
JUDGE JUDGE
DDC
1 issue framed by the court
Whether directions should be issued to the State Government to expedite hearing of the petitioner's representation regarding appointment of an administrator.
Suhas s/o. Chintaman Mulay
The Union of India
The State of Maharashtra
The Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar
The Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar Through its Commissioner
The Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar
S.S. Shinde
V.K. Jadhav
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