In PIL No. 151 of 2018, the Bombay High Court disposed of a petition alleging unauthorized construction of a percolation tank. Directions were issued to serve notice on respondents and communicate the decision.
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.
1/3
17-pil-151-18.doc
pdp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 151 OF 2018
Manohar Tukaram Choutre ..Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and ors.
..Respondents
Mr. Tejas Hilage for petitioner. Ms. Nisha Mehra, AGP for State.
CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL, CJ. & N. M. JAMDAR, J.
P.C.
2/3
17-pil-151-18.doc is further submitted that on the Lokshahi Din a complaint was made by Shantabai Ramchandra Pawar and 64 others dated 22/2/2016 addressed to Assistant Collector, Gadhinglaj Division, Gadhinglaj. The learned counsel submits that petitioner has not given any representation to any authority in respect of the subject grievance. It is further submitted that the construction of the percolation taken is not completed.
3/3
17-pil-151-18.doc
N. M. JAMDAR, J. CHIEF JUSTICE
Manohar Tukaram Choutre
The State of Maharashtra
NARESH H. PATIL
N. M. JAMDAR
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
