Dismissed

Prakruti Foundation, Chandrapur Thr. President, Deepak S/O Bharatsingh Dixit and Anr. v. Union of India, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Thr. Secretary, New Delhi and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Jan 2023PIL/2/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Nagpur dismissed a PIL alleging breach of an MOU regarding iron ore sales by directing the petitioner to first approach the concerned Department. The proceedings were disposed of as not entertained at the initial stage.

What the court decided

AI extract

Prakruti Foundation, Chandrapur Thr. President… — Mining and Natural Resources | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

960-PIL-02-23

¶2

1/2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.02 OF 20 23

¶5

Prakruti Foundation, Chandrapur Thr. President Deepak B. Dixit and anr.

¶6

-vs-

¶7

Union of India, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Thr. Secretary, Lodhi Road, New Delhi and ors.

¶8

Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri M. I. Dhatrak, Advocate for petitioner. Shri N. S. Deshpande, Deputy Solicitor General of India for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Shri A. S. Fulzele, Additional Government Pleader for respondent Nos.4, 5, 9 and 10. CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND MRS VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : January 18, 2023

¶9

P.C.

¶10

The petitioner No.1 is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 constituted for the welfare of the tribals has filed the present proceedings alleging that the respondent No.11 has been selling iron ore in breach of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) entered into between the Government of Maharashtra through the Director, Geology and Mining, Nagpur. It is alleged that iron ore excavated from the mine at Surajgarh, Tahsil Etapalli, District Gadchiroli is being sold to the Industries in breach of the said MOU. Under the MOU, excess iron ore excavated is required to be sold to industries consuming iron ore situated in Vidarbha area at reasonable price. It is prayed that the respondents be directed to control the sale of iron ore by the respondent No.11 pursuant to the mining lease granted to it.

¶11

We find from the averments made in the writ petition that though the grievance of the petitioner No.1 that sale of iron ore has been undertaken by respondent No.11 in breach of the MOU, the petitioner No.1 has not yet approached the concerned respondent which is the Department of Industry and Mines raising such grievance before it. It would be first necessary for the petitioner No.1 to point out any breach of the terms of MOU to the concerned Department and thereafter if such grievance still persists, the petitioner No.1 would be at liberty to take further steps in the matter.

¶12

960-PIL-02-23

¶13

2/2

¶14

In view of the fact that the petitioners have not approached the concerned Department for raising the aforesaid grievance, we are not inclined to entertain the proceedings at this stage. The petitioners would be at liberty to first bring to the notice of the concerned respondent the alleged breach of the MOU being committed by the respondent No.11. If the grievance of the petitioners persists thereafter, they are free to approach the Court by taking appropriate steps. Needless to state that if such steps are taken by the petitioners, the concerned respondent shall consider the same in accordance with law. All points raised in this writ petition are kept open.

¶15

Public Interest Litigation stands disposed of as not entertained.

¶16

(Mrs Vrushali V. Joshi, J.)

¶17

Asmita

¶18

Digitally Signed byASMITA ADWAIT BHANDAKKAR Personal Assistant Signing Date: 21.01.2023 10:41

Prakruti Foundation, Chandrapur Thr. President, Deepak S/O Bharatsingh Dixit and Anr. v. Union of India, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Thr. Secretary, New Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Prakruti Foundation, Chandrapur Thr. President, Deepak S/O Bharatsingh Dixit and Anr. v. Union of India, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Thr. Secretary, New Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saji Lyakaramuruyil Pappachan Vs Chief Secretary State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shirish B Patel and Another Vs State of Maharashtra and 10 Ohters

Ajay Madhusudan Marathe Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Joint Secretary Dept. of Home Affairs and Anr.

Dr. Nirmala Ramesh Vaze Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Chief Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Vilas Kailas Pawara vs the State of Maharashtra Public Works Department through Its Chief Secretary and Others

Bhagvanji Raiyani vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Bhagvanji Rayani vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Bhagvanji Raiyani vs Directorate General of Civil Aviation and Another

Shahin Sultana Ismail Khan Aza Vs Akola Municipal Corporation, Akola Thr. Its Commissioner

K and J Projects Pvt. Ltd. Thr. Authorised Signatory, Narendra P. Kaware Vs Maharashtra Airport Development Comp. Ltd. Thr. Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Mumbai

Anil S/O Babarao Sawarkar Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, School and Education Dept., Mumbai and Others

Ramesh Kumar S/O Milaram Bhoklay Vs Cotton Corporation of India Ltd., Navi Mumbai Thr. Chairman Cum Managing Director and Others

Dinesh S/O Ramswarup Sharma Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept., Mumbai and Others

Smt. Manda Wd/O Umrao Badge Vs Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and Another