Allowed

Digambar S/O Haribhau Pajgade v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, Public Works Dept. Mumbai and Others

Bombay HC29 Aug 2018PIL/60/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL regarding quality lapses in drainage works, the Court directed the respondent to initiate an inquiry within four weeks, file a police report if necessary, and withhold terminal dues of associated employees pending specific orders.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent to initiate inquiry within 4 weeks and complete within 3 months; to withhold terminal dues of involved employees.

Digambar S/O Haribhau Pajgade Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2018)

Order

2908pil60.18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶5

PUBLIC INTEREST LIGITATION NO. 60/2018.

¶6

Digambar Haribhau Pajgade - VERSUS-

¶7

State of Maharashtra and others.

¶8

Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders.

¶9

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.

¶10

DATE : AUGUST 29, 2018.

¶11

Heard Shri S.B. Wahane, learned Counsel

¶12

for the petitioner and Shri S.Y. Deopujari, learned G.P. for respondent nos. 1 to 7 and 9.

¶13

Learned counsel for petitioner has pointed out to this Court specific complaint or observation by the Sub Divisional Engineer Shri Kundurwar, in his communication dated 14.07.2018, sent to the Executive Engineer. The communication specifically shows that in drainage work, there is a concrete bed with metal layer of 80 mm. To fill in voids there,. 6 mm metal needed to be inserted, but, because of very

Order

2908pil60.18

less quantity of 6 mm metal used, voids were available in 80 mm layer at several places.

¶18

This, if correct, shows a serious lapse on the part of the concerned Executive Engineer. This court has issued notice in the matter on 13.06.2018, and thereafter reply affidavit has been filed on 08.08.2018, by respondent nos. 1 to 6. It is supported by affidavit of the Executive Engineer. The said reply affidavit is accompanied by various documents and it occupies space from page nos. 53 to page no.508 of the record.

¶19

However, the above lacunae pointed out by the Sub Divisional Engineer, has not been clarified or explained anywhere.

¶20

It is apparent that the position available on 14.07.2017, cannot be examined at this stage without opening the bed. We therefore, find substance in the contentions of the petitioner.

¶21

Learned G.P. was given time to point out from reply where this position of voids has been explained. In reply, there is no reference to these voids.

¶22

We therefore, find a case for directing

Order

2908pil60.18

respondent no.1 to hold appropriate enquiry into the entire works as per law. The enquiry should be initiated by respondent no.1 within a period of four weeks from today, and shall be completed within next three months. If necessary, police report shall also be filed in the meantime.

¶27

In this situation, we direct that till respondent no.1 passes specific orders, the retiremental/terminal dues of any employee/s associated with these works, shall not be cleared by the department.

¶28

If the works are still to be performed, respondents shall also consider handing over the supervision of same to some other authority.

¶29

With these directions, we allow the Public Interest Litigation accordingly and dispose of the same.

¶30

No costs.

¶31

JUDGE JUDGE

¶32

Rgd.

Digambar S/O Haribhau Pajgade v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, Public Works Dept. Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Digambar S/O Haribhau Pajgade v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, Public Works Dept. Mumbai and Others

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

Rajani Raju Satyanarayan Vs the Union of India and Others

Sachin S. Desai Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Shri. Balkrishna Ramchandra Kakade Vs the Principal Secretary Water Resources Department and Ors.

Bhagwanji Raiyani Vs Maharashtra Met. Region Dev. Authority and 2 Ors.

Parvez Razak Darvesh vs Dilawar Daud Gaonkhadkar and Ors.

Parshuram Balaram Patil and Anr. Vs City and Industrial Development Corporation (Maharashtra) Ltd, through Managing Director and Ors.

Shri. Mahesh Bajrang Gadekar vs High Court of Judicature of Bombay through Its Registrar General and Ors.

Vijay @ Vijaykumar Keshavrao Bahhadure Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Macchindra Narayan Singade Vs the Sanjivani Shikshan Sanstha, Asgaon, through Secretary Ashok Moharkar and Others

Shri Arun S/O Panjabrao Girhe Vs T C Benjamin Principal Secretary,Urban Development Department and 5 Ors.

Ashok Narayanlal Agrawal Legal Heir and Karta of Agrawal Family Viz. Son of N. R. Agrawal, Buldana Vs the Collector Buldhana Thr. Others

Sohant S/O Bhaskar Randive, Thorugh Guardian Father Bhaskar S/O Vithobaji Randive Vs Scheduled Tribe Certificates Scrutiny Committee, Gadchiroli through Its Chairman and 4 Others

Sau. Urmila S. Chaoudhary (Dead Thr. Lrs.) Satishkumar M. Chaudhary Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance, Mumbai and Others

Anil S/O Sheshrao Kardekar Vs Amravati Municipal Corporation, Amravati through Its Municipal Commissioner