Dismissed

Shivaji Anantrao Kulkarni v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC19 Sept 2019PIL/23/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL raised a grievance regarding the delay in constructing a specific 15-meter road stretch. The respondent municipal corporation explained that the earlier order was cancelled due to budget shortages but submitted new administrative approvals dated May 2017 and February 2018 for the road construction. The High Court accepted these submissions, found the grievance addressed, and disposed of t

What did the court decide?

The grievance was addressed by evidence of fresh administrative approvals; the suit filed as PIL is dismissed.

Shivaji Anantrao Kulkarni Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

23.18pil

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.23 OF 2018

¶5

Shivaji s/o Anantrao Kulkarni, Age: 64 years, Occu: Retired Government Servant, R/o Shanti Sadan, Ravi Nagar, Jangamwadi, Nanded ..PETITIONER

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1 The State of Maharashtra, (The Department of Urban Development, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32, Through the Secretary

¶8

The Nanded-Waghala City Municipal Corporation, Nanded, Through the Municipal Commissioner

¶9

The Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad-cumThe Director of Municipal Administration, Aurangabad

¶10

The Collector, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded ..RESPONDENTS

¶11

Mr A. G. Godhamgaonkar, Advocate holding for Mr M. D. Godhamgaonkar, Advocate for petitioner; Mr S. P. Sonpawale, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4; Mr M. D. Narwadkar, Advocate holding for Mr M. V. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶12

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND

¶13

AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

¶14

DATE : 19th September, 2019

23.18pil

(2)

ORAL ORDER:

Heard Mr Godhamgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

¶19

The grievance raised in the present public interest litigation is in respect of delay in providing the roads and more particularly a stretch of 15 meters road, namely, Shrinagar road to Jangamwadi M.S.E.B. Power Station to Taroda Naka (Purna road). It was the submission of Mr Godhamgaonkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner that though an administrative approval was granted for the very stretch of road by order dated 2^nd February, 2007 and the estimated cost of the construction was Rs.3,24,47,000/-, there was no further progress in the construction of road and as such, the residents in general were the sufferers.

¶20

In view of above referred grievance being raised in this petition, notices were issued. By an order dated 12^th January, 2016, the Division Bench of this Court thought it fit to seek response from the Municipal Corporation on the grievance raised in the petition. On 6^th August, 2019, Mr M. D. Narwadkar, learned Counsel holding for Mr Deshpande, learned Counsel for respondent No.2 prayed for some time

¶21

23.18pil

¶22

(3)

¶23

for filing an additional affidavit-in-reply for placing on record latest fact situation in the matter.

¶24

Mr Narwadkar, learned Counsel firstly invited our attention to the first affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2 – Shri. Prakash Bhimrao Kamble, Executive Engineer (JNNURM), NandedWaghala City Municipal Corporation, Nanded to submit that though certain projects were undertaken for construction of road and the stretch of road referred to in the petition as well as in the administrative order dated 2^nd February, 2007 i.e. Shrinagar road, to Jangamwadi M.S.E.B. Power Station to Taroda Naka was included in the project, subsequently due to shortage of budgetary allocation and other priority work, which was initiated for celebration of Guru-TaGaddi festival, the administrative order for construction of that stretch of road was cancelled.

¶25

Mr Narwadkar, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 invited our attention to the latest affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2 – Shri. Shivaji Vithalrao Babre, Deputy Engineer, Nanded-Waghala City Municipal Corporation, Nanded and submitted that fresh administrative approvals are granted and the very stretch of

¶26

road is included in the two administrative approvals dated 19^th May,

¶27

23.18pil

¶28

(4)

¶29

2017 and 2^nd February, 2018. By inviting our attention to the administrative approval dated 19^th May, 2017, Mr Narwadkar referred to the entire stretch of road which finds place at Sr. No.12 i.e. Samrat Ashoknagar to Jangamwadi road via workshop and this work is undertaken under the scheme known as "Dalit Vasti Sudhar Yojana" and estimated budget allocation for the said road is Rs.24,70,000/-. He then invited our attention to the subsequent administrative order dated 2^nd February, 2018 to submit that another stretch of road finds place at Sr. No.7, namely, road from the house of Sakharam Kapure to Panchshil Dresses and the budgetary allocation of funds is to the tune of Rs.37,00,000/-.

¶30

Mr Narwadkar then submitted that as per the administrative approvals, the necessary formalities would be completed and the construction of road would be completed as expeditiously as possible.

¶31

The administrative approvals placed on record referred to above and the statement made on behalf of Nanded-Waghala City Corporation through Mr Narwadkar, learned Counsel is accepted and the same takes care of the grievance raised in the petition.

¶32

23.18pil

¶33

(5)

¶34

We see no reason to pass any further order in the matter. The purpose of approaching this Court is now duly served. The public interest litigation, as such, is disposed of accordingly.

¶35

Needless to state that, if the petitioner is having any grievance of delay in work or not maintaining standard of construction in the work, he is at liberty to approach this Court for raising such grievance as and

¶36

when occasion arises and if advised.

¶37

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

¶38

sjk

Shivaji Anantrao Kulkarni v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivaji Anantrao Kulkarni v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhaskar Vishnu Mapari and Another Vs the Manager Reliance Jio Infocomm Limitd and Others

Rohit Manohar Joshi and Anr. Vs Thane Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Shri. Vinayak Shankar Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Chief Secretary and Ors.

Shramik Mukti Sanghathna Vs the Tehsildar and Ors.

Nandu Bhimrao Patil and Another Vs Union of India and Others

Vidyadhar Sudamrao Paikrao Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Vijaykumar Kashinathrao Chikhlikar and Another Vs the Principal Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistants Maharashtra State Mantralaya, Mumbai

Shaikh Shaquir Abdulsattar Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bebi Eknath Bichkule Vs Pradeep Vyas the Secretary Public Health Department and Others

Bhausaheb Mahadu Gaikwad and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Savita Vilas Telange Vs Deepa Mudhol Munde and Others

Swati Santosh Nhasade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Beed Jilha Us Tod Kamgar Vikas Mandal through Its President U M Karad Vs Aseem Gupta and Another

Khaja Bande Nawaz Educational and Socialwelfaresociety Thr Its Chairman Qazi Toufeeque Ahmed and an Vs Vandana Krihna Principal Secretary School Education Department