Disposed

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Jagdish Chotelal Gandhi and Anr.

Bombay HC18 Jul 2019CAI/56/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court terminated the proceedings in a long-pending Public Interest Litigation concerning wetland conservation. Consequently, pending Civil Applications were disposed of as infructuous, noting that no formal orders were passed in the terminated PIL. The court referred to existing rules and previous directives regarding mangroves.

What the court decided

AI extract

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Vs Jagdish… — Environment and Pollution | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

(11) PIL 137-05

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Amk

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 137 OF 2005

¶5

WITH

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 80 OF 2012

¶7

¶8

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 137 OF 2005

¶9

Jagdish Chhotalal Gandhi & Anr. Vs.

¶10

.. Petitioners

¶11

The Chief Secretary & Ors. .. Respondents

¶12

WITH

¶13

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 56 OF 2014

¶14

¶15

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 137 OF 2005

¶16

Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai .. Applicant

¶17

In the matter between

¶18

Jagdish Chhotalal Gandhi & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs. The Chief Secretary & Ors. .. Respondents

¶19

None for the Petitioner in PIL and Applicant in CAI 80/12. Mr. M. M. Pabale, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.

¶20

Ms. Kavita Anchan a/w. Ms. Heena Shaikh i/b M. V. Kini & Co. for Respondent No.7.

¶21

Ms. Kiran Bhagalia for Respondent No.4-MMRDA.

¶22

Mr. Vinod Mahadik for Respondent No.3 and Applicant in CAI 56/14. Ms. S. Maitra a/w. Mr. Nikhil Apte i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co. for Respondent No.8.

¶23

CORAM : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, C.J. & N. M. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 18th JULY, 2019.

1/2

(11) PIL 137-05

P. C. :

The Public Interest Litigation is pending in this Court since the year 2005 and in that from time to time various orders and directions have been issued.

¶28

The prolix Petition brings out the Petitioners’ concern for identifying wetland in the State of Maharashtra so that the same can be preserved, conserved and nurtured.

¶29

The Wetland (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017 have been promulgated and thus the Authority constituted under the said Rules would be bound to comply with the mandate of the Rules.

¶30

On the issue of mangroves this Court has passed orders in Public Interest Litigation that no construction would be permitted within a distance of 50 meters from the mangroves. In Public Interest Litigation directions have been issued as to when can mangroves be cut if warranted for a public project.

¶31

Accordingly, we terminate the proceedings in the Public Interest Litigation requiring the file to be consigned to the Record Room.

¶32

All the Civil Applications which are pending are disposed of as infructuous for the reasons the Public Interest Litigation has been disposed of without passing any formal orders and needless to state interim orders would also terminate as a result of proceedings in the Public Interest Litigation being terminated.

¶33

[N. M. JAMDAR, J.]

¶34

[CHIEF JUSTICE]

¶35

2/2

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Jagdish Chotelal Gandhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Jagdish Chotelal Gandhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajit Gangadhar Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shaibaz Shaikh Nazir Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Rajendrakumar K. Joshi. Convener Vs Akhil Bharat Krishi Goseva Sangh and Anr.

Ketan Tirodkar Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary

Mr. Sapan Shrivastava Vs Tower and Infrastructure Providers Association @ Taipa and Ors.

Sagar Tanhaji Shinde and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Chief Secretary and Ors.