Disposed

Kalyan Daulatrao Nalge v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary Revenue and Forest Dept. and Anr.

Bombay HC8 Jul 2022WP/7769/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court considered a writ petition seeking similar treatment to a previous interlocutory order regarding D-silting policies for dams. The Respondents, through the A.G.P., stated that decisions are in the final stages. The Court requested the Respondents to decide the representation expeditiously without specifying a time frame and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to file a representation if not already done; the Respondents are to decide it expeditiously. The writ petition is disposed of.

Kalyan Daulatrao Nalge Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

11.7769.22-wp.docx

¶2

Digitally TRUSHA signed byTRUSHATUSHAR TUSHAR MOHITE MOHITE Date:2022.07.12 11:07:58 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.7769 OF 2022

¶5

Kalyan Daulatrao Nalge

¶6

….. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶9

….. Respondents

¶10

Mr. Suresh M. Sabrad for the Petitioner

¶11

Ms.M.P.Thakur, A.G.P. for the State

¶12

CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA & S. M. MODAK, JJ.

¶13

DATED : JULY 8, 2022

¶14

P.C.

¶15

1 The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Petitioner is similarly situated as in Writ Petition No.1621 of 2020. Same order be passed in the present Writ Petition as is passed in Writ Petition No.1621 of 2020. In the Writ Petition No.1621 of 2020, we had only directed to decide the representation.

¶16

2 We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that policy is introduced in the year 2018 with regard to the D-Silting of the major dams. Apart from the said policy, there is no policy in respect of other dams such as medium and small dams.

¶17

3 The learned A.G.P.appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that the writ dam is also now being categorized as a major

1/2

Mohite

11.7769.22-wp.docx

dam for Ujani Dam, the policy is introduced.

¶22

4 The next contention is that no further steps are taken by the respondents for D-Silting of the dam. The learned A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 and 2, on instructions, submits that the process of taking policy decision in respect of the D-silting of the dam is at the last stage.

¶23

5 In view of that we expect the decision will be taken by the respondents expeditiously.

¶24

6 We hope and trust that the respondents shall take decision as has been contended expeditiously. We may not lay down the time frame for the same, however, the said decision shall be taken expeditiously.

¶25

7 If the representation is given by the petitioner, the Government shall take decision on such presentation on its own merits.

¶26

8 Writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶27

(S. M. MODAK,J.)

¶28

(S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)

¶29

2/2

¶30

Mohite

Kalyan Daulatrao Nalge v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary Revenue and Forest Dept. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalyan Daulatrao Nalge v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary Revenue and Forest Dept. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ansari Ahmed Mohammed Yusuf Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Jagdish Swarath Giri Vs the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and 2 Ors.

The President Maharashtra Shivai Sahitya Kala Prathisthan Vaduj and Anr. Vs Vitthal Tulshiram Satpute and Anr.

Iqra Education Society and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra Directorate of Primary Education and Ors.

Sou. Siddhi Sandip Kariwadekar Vs Ld Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad Sindhudurg and Ors.

Deepak Sakharam Kamble Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Police (H.Q-1) and Ors.