Disposed

Shejad Khan Amanullah Khan Pathan v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC15 Jul 2019PIL/83/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a PIL concerning an encroachment in a water channel obstructing water flow and posing a health hazard. The Court directed the District Collector to take appropriate action on the petitioner's representation within six weeks, ensuring a hearing opportunity to affected parties.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to District Collector Parbhani to act on representation within six weeks and provide opportunity of hearing to parties.

Shejad Khan Amanullah Khan Pathan Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

( 1 )

¶2

83.19pil

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.83 OF 2019

¶5

Shejad Khan Amanullah Khan Pathan
Age: 35 years, Occ: Business &
Social Worker, R/o. Pathan Mohalla,
Jintur, Tq. Jintur, Dist. Parbhani

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1. The State of Maharashtra Through Ministry of Urban Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai

¶9

2. District Collector, District Parbhani

¶10

3. The Tahasildar Tahasil Office, Jintur Tq. Jintur, Dist. Parbhani

¶11

4. The Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Jintur

¶12

5. Keshav Arjunrao Budhawant Age: 42 years, Occ: Agri.,

¶13

6. Milindkumar Gulabrao Sanghai, Age: Major, Occ: Business,

¶14

7. Gopal Ramprasad Dayma, Age: Major, Occ: Business,

¶15

8. Sunil Nandkishor Doifode, Age: Major, Occ: Business,

¶16

( 2 ) 83.19pil

¶17

9. Sainath Ashok Doifode, Age: Major, Occ: Business,

¶18

10. Pandurang Kishanrao Rokade, Age: Major, Occ: Business,

¶19

Respondent Nos. 5 to 10
R/o. Yeladari Road, Jintur,
Tq. Jintur, Dist. ParbhaniRESPONDENTS

¶20

Mr Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, Advocate for the petitioner;
Mr S.D. Ghayal, A.G.P. for respondent/State

¶21

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE &
R.G. AVACHAT, JJ.

¶22

DATED :15th JULY, 2019

¶23

ORAL ORDER:

¶24

Heard Mr. Narwadkar, learned Counsel for the

¶25

petitioner.

¶26

2. Mr. Narwadkar, learned Counsel appearing for the

¶27

petitioner orally prays for amendment to the petition by
placing on record the representation submitted to the

¶28

District Collector, Parbhani. He submits that though the

¶29

reference is made to the said representation in the

¶30

petition, copy of the representation was not placed on

¶31

record due to inadvertence. Oral prayer is allowed.
Amendment be carried out forthwith.

¶32

3.The petitioner raises grievance of an

¶33

encroachment in the way of water channel obstructing
water channel thereby an apprehension is being carried in
the mind of residents that logging of water or blockage
of water due to encroachment in the channel may lead to
health hazardous. Our attention was invited to the copy
of the representation submitted to the District
Collector, Parbhani dated 10th April, 2019.

¶34

4.Perusal of the petition shows that Tahsildar,

¶35

Jintur i.e. respondent No. 3 himself took cognizance of
an encroachment in the water channel and issued notice to
one of the encroacher Arjun Keshavrao Budhawant on 22nd
March, 2019. Copy of the panchnama is also placed on
record. This panchnama is drawn on 28th March, 2019

¶36

referring to certain encroachment. It is not in dispute
that the State Government recently formulated policy for
removal of the encroachment in urban and rural areas on
the backdrop of judicial pronouncements of Hon'ble the

¶37

Apex Court. Government Resolution also refers to
modalities wherein officers of village administration or
district administration with the assistance of law
enforcing agency can take appropriate steps either to
prevent encroachment or to remove encroachment on the
public land or Government land.

¶38

5.Considering these facts, we are of the opinion

¶39

that present public interest litigation can be disposed
of at this stage by issuing directions to respondent No.
2 District Collector, Parbhani. Accordingly, we direct
respondent No.2 - District Collector, Parbhani to take
appropriate action on the representation dated 10th
April, 2019 as early as possible and not later than six
weeks from the date of the order of this Court. Needless

¶40

to state that in view of Government policy as well as the
judgment of the Hon'ble the Apex Court if the provision
is made for opportunity of hearing to the parties,
respondent No.2 - District Collector, Parbhani to provide
such an opportunity of hearing to the respective parties
including the petitioner.

¶41

6.With these directions, Public Interest

¶42

Litigation is disposed of.

¶43

[R.G. AVACHAT, J.] [PRASANNA B. VARALE,J.]

¶44

Tupe

Shejad Khan Amanullah Khan Pathan v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shejad Khan Amanullah Khan Pathan 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

Vishwash Pandurang Gadigaonkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and 6 Ors.

Sapan Shrivastava and Anr. Vs Reserve Bank of India and Ors.

Shri. Ashok Shivaji Bansode and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra Thorugh Chief Secretary and Ors.

Mr. Satish Khot and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra Thru Secretary, Dept. of Urban Development and Ors.

Nadeem Riyasatali Kapoor Vs Harun Khan and 8 Ors.

Sandesh Chandrakant Waikar Vs the State of Maharashtra and 7 Others

Friends of Society and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 6 Ors.

Hardas Hazarimal Tharwani Vs State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Developmen, Relief and Rehabi. and Ors.

Balaji Vajinath Bellale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Jitendra Bajilal Sonawane Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

The Maharashtra State Other Backward Class Finance and Development Corporation Ltd. Thr Dist Manager Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Yashraj Enterprises Thr Proprietor S S Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vitthal Shyamsing Pawar and Others Vs Rajgopal Devara and Others

Balaji Pandurang Biradar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others