Dismissed

Basavraj Shivaling Jibkate v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Jan 2021PIL/128/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a PIL regarding the use of Garware Stadium premises. The Court permitted the Municipal Corporation to utilize a specific orange-marked area for non-sports activities including parking, while ensuring the playing arena remains dedicated for sports.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to the Municipal Corporation to utilize the area marked in orange in the lay-out plan for non-sports activities including parking.

Basavraj Shivaling Jibkate Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

{1}

¶2

pil128.13a.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 128 OF 2013

¶5

Basavraj s/o Shivaling Jibkate & another

¶6

Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra & others

¶9

Respondents

¶10

Mr. M.B. Bharaswadkar, advocate for the petitioners. Mr. D.R. Kale, Government Pleader for the respondent no.1. Mr. S.G. Chapalgaonkar, advocate for the respondents 2 & 3.

¶11

CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ & RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

¶12

DATE : JANUARY 22, 2021

¶13

PC :

¶14

This Public Interest Litigation Petition was instituted in 2013 seeking direction on the respondents not to use the Garware Stadium premises for activities other than sports and not to rent the Garware Stadium premises for private and public functions, as well as for quashing Resolution No.642 of 2012 of the Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad, specifying the rent for non-sports programmes at the Garware Stadium premises.

¶15

In deference to orders passed by this Court on this Public Interest Litigation petition from time to time it has been ensured that the playing arena forming part of the Garware Stadium premises are not used for non-sports activities. A civil application was fled by the Municipal Corporation seeking permission to use the barren land within the Garware Stadium

¶16

{2}

¶17

pil128.13a.odt

¶18

premises for non- sports activities. By an order dated 20^th January, 2021, we had called upon the Municipal Corporation to make its stand clear qua the photograph at page 25 of the PIL petition by indicating which portion(s) it proposes to utilize for purposes other than sports activities.

¶19

An afdavit dated 21^st January, 2021 of the Assistant Commissioner (In-Charge HOD Sports), Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad, has been fled. To such afdavit is annened a lay out plan of the Garware Stadium premises and Aurangabad Kalagram, marked “R-1” for identifcation. Referring to the portion marked in orange (parking and other activities), Mr. Chapalgaonkar, learned advocate for the Municipal Corporation, submits that other than such portion, non-sports activities shall not be allowed in any other part of the Garware Stadium premises and that the order of injunction passed earlier may be suitably modifed.

¶20

Mr. Bharaswadkar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners, however, complains that there is inadequacy of parking space and that the Municipal Corporation must suggest ways and means as to how vehicles entering the Garware Stadium premises would be accommodated.

¶21

The main purpose for which the PIL petition was instituted has been served since the Municipal Corporation has accepted that the playing arena would not be touched for non-

¶22

pil128.13a.odt

¶23

sports activities. We make it clear that should there be any departure from the stand taken in the afdavit by the Municipal Corporation, the petitioners shall be at liberty to invite the attention of this Court to such departure and seek appropriate relief. We, however, permit the Municipal Corporation to utilize the area in the said lay out plan, marked in orange, for activities other than sports including as parking area. We also make it clear that the Municipal Corporation shall, at all times, maintain the playing arena in good condition together with the other areas marked in the lay out plan for sports activities. Needless to observe, the walking area around the playing arena shall also be maintained in proper condition.

¶24

We do not think that the contention raised today by Mr. Bharaswadkar would require any direction from the Court. Where and how vehicles entering the Garware Stadium premises would be parked is not a concern enpressed in this PIL petition. Even otherwise, parking of vehicles is a matter for the Municipal Corporation to look into and to adopt appropriate decision in that regard.

¶25

Accordingly, the PIL petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending civil applications do not survive and stand disposed of.

¶26

(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE) adb

Basavraj Shivaling Jibkate v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basavraj Shivaling Jibkate v. the State of Mah and Ors.

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

Maharashtra Apang Kamgar Kalyankari Sangh through Its District Vice President a M Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Jyoti Rajendra Thombre Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Grampanchayat Savangi through Its Upa Sarpanch Shaikh Kadir Shaikh Abdul Raheman Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vinod Nagorao Bharne Vs the Union of India and Others

Milind Pralhad Bansode Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mahendrasing Premsing Jadhav and Anothers Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Courts on Its Motion Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Department of Labour, Mumbai and 2 Others

Sanjay Ishwarrao Bhosikar and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ratilal Champalal Prarekh Vs the Br Manaager Life Insurance Corporation of India and Ors.

Subhash Budhaji Wagh Vs the Disciplinary Authority I.E. Deputy General Manager, the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Rupesh S/O. Anil Jaiswal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ajinath Pandurang Vare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shriram Baburao Pisal Vs the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Kadirkhan Ahmedkhan Pathan Vs the Maharashtra State Warehousing Corporation through Chairman and Managing Director and Others