Disposed

Courts on Its Own Motion v. State of Maharashtra, in the Ministry of Revenue and Forest, through Its Secretary, Mumbai and Othe

Bombay HC25 Sept 2019PIL/65/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Four public interest litigations challenging sand policies were disposed of as infructuous due to the framing of a new sand policy by the State Government. No substantive legal questions were adjudicated.

What did the court decide?

The four public interest litigations stand disposed of as infructuous.

What the court decided

Courts on Its Own Motion Vs State of Maharashtra… — Environment and Pollution | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

2509pil110.18 & others

¶2

1/2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 110 OF 2018
 (Krishna Kumar Agrawal vs. Union of India and others)
WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.65 OF 2018
(Court on its own motion vs. State of Maharashtra and others)
WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.66 OF 2018
(Krishna Kumar Agarwal vs. The Ministry of Environment and Forest and others)
 WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.145 OF 2018
 (Dinesh s/o Manohar Shedame vs. Union of India and others)

¶5

________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶6

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.110 OF 2018

¶7

Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, Advocate for petitioner.

¶8

Shri U.M. Aurangabadkar, Assistant Solicitor General of India
for respondent nos.1, 2 and 17.

¶9

Ms. N.P. Mehta, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent
nos.3 to 15.

¶10

Shri M.N. Upadhyay, Advocate for respondent no.16.
Shri S.S. Sanyal, Advocate for respondent nos.18 to 20.

¶11

 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.65 OF 2018

¶12

Shri A.S. Jaiswal, Senior Advocate – amicus curiae, assisted
by Adv. N.G. Moharir.

¶13

Shri A.S. Fulzele, Additional Government Pleader for
respondent nos.1 to 3, 7 to 15, 17 to 30 and 39 to 50.

¶14

Shri A. Parchure, Advocate and Shri S.P. Bhandarkar,
Advocate for respondent nos.4 to 6.

¶15

 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.66 OF 2018

¶16

Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, Advocate for petitioner.

¶17

Shri U.M. Aurangabadkar, Assistant Solicitor General of India
for respondent no.1.

¶18

Ms. N.P. Mehta, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent
nos.2 to 10.

¶19

Shri A.M. Ghare, Advocate for respondent no.11.

¶20

 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.145 OF 2018

¶21

Shri D.V. Mahajan, Advocate and Shri A.S. Agrawal, Advocate
for petitioner.

¶22

2/2

¶23

2509pil110.18 & others

¶24

Shri U.M. Aurangabadkar, Assistant Solicitor General of India
for respondent nos.1 and 2.
Shri A.S. Fulzele, Additional Government Pleader for
respondent nos.3 to 13.

¶25

CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE AND VINAY JOSHI, JJ.

¶26

 DATED : SEPTEMBER 25, 2019

¶27

All these public interest litigations can be
disposed of as having become infructuous in view of
the fact that a new sand policy has already been
framed and brought into force by the State
Government. Needless to say that if anyone is
aggrieved by such policy, he will be at liberty to file
appropriate proceedings.

¶28

Accordingly, the public interest litigations
stand disposed of.

¶29

JUDGE JUDGE

¶30

khj

Courts on Its Own Motion v. State of Maharashtra, in the Ministry of Revenue and Forest, through Its Secretary, Mumbai and Othe

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Courts on Its Own Motion v. State of Maharashtra, in the Ministry of Revenue and Forest, through Its Secretary, Mumbai and Othe

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

Abhijit Ramesh Mapari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Prakash Baburao Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Somnath Kantilal Munde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sachin Purshottam Bhairavkar Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Yadav Piraji Kolnure and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shahuraj Laxman Mane and Anr. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Federation of All Lminority Educational Organization (Fame) Thr Zonal Chairman Vs the Union of India Thr Principal Secretary and Ors.

Shivkumar Vitthal Gulve and Anr. Vs the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Maharashtra Rajya Paddawidhar Prathamik Shikshak Mahasangh, through Its President, Bhandara Vs Shri Ravindra Jagtap, Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Bhandara and Others

Taj Ahemad S/O Ali Ahemad and Others Vs Government of Maharashtra through Planning Department, Mumbai and Others

The Central India Institute of Mass Communication, through Sunil Gayaprasad Mishra Vs the Chancellor, Rtm Nagpur University, Mumbai and Others

Krishna Kumar Agarwal Vs the Ministry of Environment and Forest, through Its Secretary, Govt. of India, New Delhi and Others

Shriram Balkrushna Patankar Vs the District Collector, Nagpur and Another

Vivekanand Polytechnic, Sitasavangi Thr. Principal Shri Nagendra Umedchand Daharwal and Anr. Vs the All India Council for Technical Education, (Aicte) New Delhi and Others