The High Court dismissed a PIL complaint, directing the petitioner to approach the Barshi Municipal Council (Respondent No. 8) first before any further complaint is filed.
Petitioner directed to approach Respondent No. 8 (Barshi Municipal Council) via a fresh representation.
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.
Digitally signed byMUGDHA MUGDHA MANOJ MANOJ PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2024.02.15 14:06:54 +0530
1 31-PIL 29-21.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 29 OF 2021
Dinanath Manik Katkar … Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra, through it’s Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents
Mr. Sujeet R. Bugade for the Petitioner.
Mr. P. P. Kakade, GP with Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Addl. GP with Mrs. G. R. Raghuvanshi, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 4, 6 and 7-State.
Mr. Jagdish G. Aradwad (Reddy) for Respondent No.8.
CORAM : DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. & ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATE : 14th FEBRUARY 2024
P.C. :
Heard learned Counsel representing the Petitioner, learned Government Pleader representing the Respondent-State
and learned Counsel representing the Respondent-Barshi Municipal Council.
1 of 3
Mugdha
2 31-PIL 29-21.doc
2 of 3
Mugdha
3 31-PIL 29-21.doc
considered and appropriate decision shall be taken, which may be warranted under the law within eight weeks thereafter.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)
(CHIEF JUSTICE)
3 of 3
Mugdha
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Public Interest Litigation should be disposed of by directing the grievance to be raised with the Competent Authority first.
Dinanath Manik Katkar
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Barshi Municipal Council
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA
ARIF S. DOCTOR
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
