Disposed

Anandrao Sambhaji Kadam v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC29 Aug 2019PIL/37/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL, the petitioner sought directions to abandon existing road expansion for NH-161 and initiate bypass construction. The court dismissed the prayer, holding no public purpose would be served and abandonment would cause financial loss and delay.

What did the court decide?

None. The petition was dismissed as no direction to abandon existing work or start bypass was issued.

Anandrao Sambhaji Kadam Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶2

 917 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.37 OF 2019

¶3

ANANDRAO SAMBHAJI KADAM

¶4

VERSUS

¶5

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶6

...

¶7

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr.Latange V.P.
AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 : Mr.A.B.Girase
Advocate for Respondent No. 5 : Mr.M.V.Kini & Co. and

¶8

Mr.Manorkar Deepak S.

¶9

Advocate for Respondent Nos. 5 & 7: Mr. D.S. Manorkar
Advocate for respondent No. 6 : Mr. D.G. Nagode
Advocate for respondent Nos. 8 & 9 : Mr. P.P. Mandlik

¶10

...

¶11

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND AVINASH G.GHAROTE, JJ.

¶12

DATED : 29^th AUGUST, 2019.

¶13

ORAL ORDER :

¶14

Heard Mr. Latange, the learned counsel for the

¶15

petitioner, Mr. A.B. Girase, the learned Government

¶16

Pleader appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3,

¶17

Mr. Mandlik, the learned counsel for respondent Nos. 5

¶18

and 7 and Mr.Nagode, the learned counsel for respondent
No. 6.

¶19

2.Mr. Mandlik, the learned counsel for

¶20

intervenor-respondent Nos. 5 and 7 submits that the

¶21

2 pil37.19

¶22

petitioner has espoused the public cause before this
Court. It is the prayer in the Writ Petition that by

¶23

way of directions, the principal prayer in the
present Public Interest Litigation is the prayer
Clause 'C' and thereby the petitioner is seeking
direction to the respondent authorities, that the
acquisition process be started in view of the
Government notifications dated 6.8.2018 and 7.1.2019
for the construction of the National Highway No. 361,
from Wardha-Yeotamal-Waranga Phata Section, District
Hingoli, in the State of Maharashtra, and start the
process of construction of by-pass and for that
purpose, issue necessary orders.

¶24

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner
placed heavy reliance on minutes of meeting dated
21.3.2018 and submitted that the respondent authority
i.e. the National Highway Pradhikaran was of the
opinion that the by-pass is an alternate to the
National Highway passing through Waranga Phata.

¶25

3 pil37.19

¶26

4.Notice was issued to the respondents and an

¶27

affidavit in reply is filed on behalf of the Project
Director through Mr.R.V. Singh, for respondent No.
6. In his oral submission Mr. Manorkar, the learned
counsel for respondent Nos. 5 and 7, invited our
attention to the various documents placed on record
including a map at Exh. R-1 and further submitted
that the minutes of meeting on which the petitioner
has placed heavy reliance, is the only proposal to be
submitted to the Higher Authorities for their
consideration and mere preliminary opinion cannot be
a decisive factor, so as to undertake the work of the
construction of the road so as to effect the changes
in the road. Mr. Manorkar, learned counsel for
respondent Nos. 5 and 7 by inviting our attention to

¶28

the map submitted that though it was initially a
proposal by providing the by-pass, an alternate way
on the repeated representations and requests made to

¶29

the authorities, the authorities thought it fit to
expand the road to meet the demands of the hour. Our

¶30

4 pil37.19

¶31

attention is invited to the copy of the

¶32

representation submitted to the authority. It was

¶33

then submission of Mr. Manorkar that the authority
was requested to expand the road on the backdrop of

¶34

the fact that the exercise of the bypass would then
result in acquisition of certain lands, which are
fertile lands and instead of undertaking such a
course, if existing road is expanded, it may be more
fruitful for all purposes. It is also submitted
before us by Mr. Mandilk, the learned Senior Counsel
appearing on behalf of the interveners that the
exercise of expansion of the existing road i.e. MH-
161 was already in process and progress. Our
attention is also invited to the copies of the award

¶35

placed on record and submitted that the basic
activities, such as, acquisition of the land, is
already undertaken and abandonment of this work would

¶36

only result in loss to the Public Exchequer and there
would be further delay in making available transport
facilities.

¶37

5 pil37.19

¶38

5.Mr. Manorkar, learned counsel for respondent

¶39

Nos. 5 and 7 then submits before us that in so far as
the National High Way No. 361 is concerned, the
exercise of acquisition of majority of land is
completed and, more particularly, out of the area to
the extent of 1.81 hectors, an area of 1.54 hectors
is already acquired. In so far as the position of
National High Way No. 161 Akola-Hingoli (Waranga-
Fata) is concerned, Mr. Mandlik, the learned Senior
Advocate by inviting our attention to the E-Statement
placed on record at Annexure - 'X-1' submits that the
total area under the award for acquisition is 304.36
R and to the majority of land owners, even the
compensation is also paid. He also invited our
attention to the joint measurement statement placed
at Exh. X-3 & submits that the measurement was
carried out on 07.02.2018 and this document can

¶40

safely be relied on, as it is a certified statement.

¶41

6.Considering all these aspects, we are of the
clear opinion that no public purpose would be served

¶42

6 pil37.19

¶43

at this stage by directing respondents/ National High

¶44

Way Authority to abandon expansion work of the
construction in relation to the National High Way No.
161, 'Vardha-Yavatmal-Waranga Phata' and directing
the authorities to undertake the work of by-pass
afresh. We also find the merit in the submission of
Mr. Mandlik, learned Senior Advocate that such
abandonment of the work and initiation of work of
by-pass afresh would only result in the loss of
public exchequer and no fruitful purpose would be
served.

¶45

7.Considering these facts, we see no reason to
issue any direction as prayed by the petitioner in
the present Public Interest Litigation. Accordingly,
the present Public Interest Litigation is disposed
of.

¶46

 (AVINASH G. GHAROTE) (PRASANNA B. VARALE)
JUDGEJUDGE

¶47

mahajansb/

Anandrao Sambhaji Kadam v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anandrao Sambhaji Kadam 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

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Anjan Kumar Chatterjee Vs the Union of India, through the Secretary to Government, Ministry of Finance, New Dehlhi and 3 Othe

Mr. Sagar Rajabhau Suryavanshi Vs Union of India through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Kishan Nathu Ghutiya and Anr. Vs the Administrator, Silvassa and Ors.

Vishal Hanmantrao Mohite Vs Maharashtra Public Service Commissin and Ors.

The Maharashtra Wakf Liberation and Protection Task Force through Its President and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kiran Shriwallabh Sharma Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shri. Anupam Ajit Kambali Vs Union of India through Jt. Secretary and Ors.

Mehul Mepani Vs Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors.

Mohammed Haroon Khan Mohammed Khudabax Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kacharu Piraji Kolpe and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shivaji Balnath Bane and Anr. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Sunil Dattatraya Muttepwar Vs Purushottam Bhapkar the Divisional Commissioner Aurangabad

The Jalgaon Market Yard Adat Association through Authorized Member Deepak Dinkar Mahajan Vs Chandrashekhar Omprakash Tripathi and Others

Krushna Mhatardev Tandale and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others