Dismissed

Bharat P. Satra v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC18 Jul 2022PIL/40/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment considered an interim application seeking restoration of a PIL petition filed to direct the State to amend the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The court dismissed the petition, holding that directing legislation amendment is impermissible under Article 226 and the petition was filed for academic purpose without cause of action.

What the court decided

AI extract

Bharat P. Satra Vs State of Maharashtra… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

12-IA.4658.2022

¶2

Jvs.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4658 OF 2022 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 40 OF 2022 WITH

¶5

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 40 OF 2022

¶6

Bharat P. Satra In the matter of	} Applicant
Bharat P. Satra	} Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Anr.	} Respondents

¶7

Mr. Bharat Satra, applicant/petitioner in-person. Mr. Abhay L. Patki, Additional Government Pleader for State.

¶8

CORAM: DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. & ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.

¶9

DATE: 20^th DECEMBER, 2023

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1. The petitioner, by moving this interim application, seeks restoration of the PIL petition.

¶12

2. The PIL petition was dismissed for non-prosecution by means of an order dated 18^th July 2022. We find that the cause shown in the interim application is sufficient. Accordingly, the interim application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads as under: -.

¶13

“a) Be please, set aside order dated 18.07.2022 and restore this PIL for the justice.”

¶14

3. The writ petition is, thus, restored to file to its original number.

¶15

¶16

12-IA.4658.2022

¶17

Public Interest Litigation No. 40 of 2022 :

¶18

4. This PIL petition has been filed for the following reliefs: -

¶19

“a) to intervene in the section 16(g), 16(2), 53, 55(3) and 56(2), 60 of the Maharashtra Rent control Act, 1999, to protect the rights of the tenants at large and provide justice to them by directing to the Respondent for amendment, omission, addition etc.;

¶20

b) to interpret in the section 16(g), 16(2), 53, 55(3) and 56(2) of the Maharashtra Rent control Act, 1999, for protect the rights of the tenants and provide justice to the tenants;

¶21

c) court may appoint commissions to collect information on facts and present it before the bench to avoid injustice;

¶22

d) To pass any directives/orders as deemed fit and proper, in the Public Interest;

¶23

e) Petitioner may allow any interim application or correct and amend the petition any time during the hearing of this PIL;

¶24

f) For the act of kindness, the petitioner shall ever pray for.”

¶25

5. From a bare perusal of the prayers made by the petitioner, it is clear that the petition has been filed only for academic purpose as the petitioner calls upon us to interpret certain provisions of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 and to further direct the respondents (State) to amend/omit/add in the said provisions of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.

¶26

6. In absence of any cause of action, if the petitioner calls upon the Court to interpret some piece of legislation, admittedly, the petition would not be maintainable. Further, the petitioner has prayed that the State be directed to make amendments/omissions/additions etc. in the Maharashtra

¶27

¶28

12-IA.4658.2022

¶29

Rent Control Act, 1999. This, in fact, is impermissible for the Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The PIL petition is entirely misconceived. It is hereby dismissed.

¶30

JAYANT VISHWANATH SALUNKE

¶31

Digitally signed by JAYANT VISHWANATH SALUNKE Date: 2023.12.20 18:33:23 +0530

¶32

(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶33

Bharat P. Satra v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Bharat P. Satra v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagvanji Rayani vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar National Asso. of Engineers, Nagpur Thr. President, Methaji S. Bhaladhare vs the State of Maha., Thr. Principal Secretary, Higher and Tech. Education Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Pradeep Vithal Girme Vs Saswad Municipal Council and Ors.

Prashant R. Phanse Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Saji Iyakaramuruyil Pappachan Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Principal Secretary Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Ravindra Kuber Walawade Vs Union of India through Ministry of Environment and Health Dept. and Ors.

Shree Ganeshay Seva Sanstha and Ors. Vs Municipal Commissioner Vasai Virar Municipal Office and Ors.

Ravindra Kuber Walawade Vs Union of India through Ministry of Environment and Health Dept. and Ors.

Ashok Pandurang Kadam and Anr. Vs Mahadevi Shashikant Chougule and Ors.

Mehbub Hasan Sayyed Vs Josef Alas Ashtamkar and Anr.

Ashok Pandurang Kadam and Anr. Vs Mahadevi Shashikant Chougule and Ors.

Ags Transact Technologies Limited and Anr. Vs the Bank of India

Sharadchandran K Swaminathan Vs Union of India and 5 Ors.

Lt Col Pankaj Ahuja (Retd) Vs Union of India through the Ministry of Defence and Ors.