The High Court disposed of a PIL filed in 2006 concerning Worli Seaface Road town planning classification, deeming it unviable after eighteen years and substantial changes. The Court clarified that the petition may be re-invoked if the cause survives under relevant rules.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
45-pil-90-2006.doc
1
Trupti
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 90 OF 2006
Save Worli Seaface Samiti & Another
… Petitioners
versus
The State of Maharashtra & Others … Respondents
None for the Petitioners.
Mr. Abhay Patki, Addl. GP for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 5. Mr. Pesi Modi with Mr. Aditya N. Raut i/b. Desai Desai Carrimjee and Mulla for Respondent No.7.
Ms.Oorja Dhond i/b. Mr.S.K.Sonawane for the Respondent – Municipal Corporation.
Mr. Parag A. Vyas with Ms. Karuna Yadav for the Respondent – UOI.
CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR, ACJ & SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATE : 7 JUNE 2023
P.C.:
None for the Petitioners. None had appeared earlier as well. The matter is notified on the cause list in advance.
Trupti 2 45-pil-90-2006.doc
Seaface Road. The PIL is filed on the situation existed eighteen years ago. The learned Counsel appearing for the respective Respondents point out that the substantial changes have taken place in the area since the PIL was filed. No affidavit is filed in respect of the present position. No purpose will be served by keeping the PIL pending. In these circumstances, the PIL is disposed of. However, we clarify that if the cause survives, it is always open to a bona fide public spirited person/ entity to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court after complying the Bombay High Court Public Interest Litigation Rules, 2010.
( SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)
(ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the PIL filed in 2006 regarding town planning classification can be disposed of due to substantial changes in the area.
Save Worli Seaface Samiti
Another
The State of Maharashtra
Nitin Jamdar
Sandeep V. Marne
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
