A PIL filed by a former corporator seeking cancellation of a work order for footpath construction under the National Clean Air Programme was dismissed. The Court found no illegality or public detriment in utilizing NCAP funds for dust reduction works as claimed by the petitioner.
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.
- 1 -
pil24.24.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 24 OF 2024
Parveen Kaisar Khan .. Petitioner
versus
The State of Maharashtra & others .. Respondents
Mr. S. S. Thombre, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. A. A. A. Khan, AGP for the State.
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND R. M. JOSHI, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 21st MARCH, 2024. PRONOUNCED ON : 2nd APRIL, 2024
PER COURT : ( Per R. M. Joshi, J.)
pil24.24.odt
pil24.24.odt
allotment thereof. The only grievance made by the Petitioner is that the funds received under NCAP cannot be utilised for the work other than covered by the said programme. In this regard we have carefully gone through the material placed before us wherein it is found that NCAP is aimed to improve air quality and public health by identifying cost-effective measures to reduce emission from all the known sources. It further indicates such measures also include reduction of road dust. In this backdrop, needless to say that the work of construction of foot paths and laying down paver blocks is aimed at reduction of emission of dust particles from foot paths on road. Prima faice, we are of the view that the work sought to be undertaken by the Corporation cannot be said to be alien/unconnected to the NCAP. Similarly, merely because some other funds are made available for the Corporation to do the said work, there is no bar/prohibition for using the funds received under NCAP for the same.
pil24.24.odt
undertaken by the Corporation which is the subject matter of the present Public Interest Litigation comes within the said parameter. We have no reason to hold that the said work is against the interest of the public or the work has been carried out illegally from the funds not meant for the said work. In such circumstances, we do not find any propriety in issuing any direction against the Respondents.
( R. M. JOSHI) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE) JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a work order for footpath construction funded under the National Clean Air Programme can be challenged by filing a Public Interest Litigation.
Parveen Kaisar Khan
The State of Maharashtra
Ravindra V. Ghuge
R. M. Joshi
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
