Dismissed¶21

Cyril Samuel Dara v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC28 Apr 2025PIL/57/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court PIL dismissed on 28-04-2025 (Alok Aradhe, CJ. & M. S. Karnik, J.) as duplicative: subject matter already before the Court in Writ Petition Nos. 4922 of 2024 and 6150 of 2024 filed by the Management of Wilson College, the aggrieved party. Petitioner Cyril Samuel Dara (an advocate) had sought mandamus to quash a government memorandum dated 16/03/2024 and a government decision dated 25/7/2019 issued by Respondent No.1, and re-allotment of land C.S.No. 471, Bhuleshwar Division, Mumbai as a publicly accessible playground. No merits adjudicated; no statutes or precedent cases cited.

What did the court decide?

Not inclined to entertain the present PIL, since its subject matter is already being examined by this Court in Writ Petition Nos. 4922 of 2024 and 6150 of 2024 at the instance of the aggrieved party. ¶20

Cyril Samuel Dara vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

5-PIL-57-2024.doc

¶2

Pdp

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 57 OF 2024

¶4

Cyril Samuel Dara .. Petitioner Versus

¶5

State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

¶6

Mr. Suhas S. Deokar a/w Atharv A. Gidaye for petitioner. Dr. Birendra Saraf, Advocate General with Smt. Prachi Tatake, Addl. Govt. Pleader for respondent nos. 1 and 2.

¶7

Mr. Ram Apte, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prafulla Shah i/by Ms. Gunjan Shah for respondent no.3.

¶8

CORAM: ALOK ARADHE, CJ. & M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶9

Digitally signed PRAVINDASHARATHPANDIT by PRAVINDASHARATHPANDITDate:2025.04.29 17:44:28 +0530

¶10

DATE: 28^th APRIL, 2025

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1. The petitioner claims to be an Advocate and has filed the petition as Public Interest Litigation in which following reliefs are claimed: -

¶13

“(a) That by Writ of Mandamus and or by appropriate Writ, Direction and Order of similar nature, Your Lordships be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned government memorandum dated 16/03/2024 issued by Respondent No.1 annexed and exhibited at “I” .

¶14

(b) That by Writ of Mandamus and or by appropriate Writ, Direction and Order of similar nature, Your Lordships be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned government decision dated 25/7/2019 issued by Respondent No.1 annexed and exhibited at “E” .

¶15

¶16

5-PIL-57-2024.doc

¶17

(c) That by Writ of Mandamus and or by appropriate Writ, Direction and Order of similar nature, Your Lordships be pleased to direct the Respondent No1 to allot the land having C.S.No. 471 of Bhuleshwar Division, Mumbai to any other person or institution having extraordinary merit and exceptional performance in the field of sporting activities with the condition that the said land/playground shall be available to the public at large as it was in the earlier lease.”

¶18

2. Learned Advocate General has invited the attention of this Court to ground (a) pleaded in the PIL and has submitted that the instant PIL on petitioner’s own showing has been filed to support the endeavour of the students of Wilson College. It is further submitted that in respect of reliefs claimed in the PIL, the Management of Wilson College has filed Writ Petition Nos. 4922 of 2024 and 6150 of 2024, which are pending adjudication before this Court.

¶19

3. The aforesaid submission is placed on record.

¶20

4. In view of the fact that the subject matter of the PIL is already being examined by this Court in Writ Petition Nos.4922 of 2024 and 6150 of 2024 at the instance of the aggrieved party, we are not inclined to entertain the present PIL.

¶21

5. Accordingly, the PIL is dismissed.

¶22

(M. S. KARNIK, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶23

Cyril Samuel Dara v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cyril Samuel Dara v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bhagvanji Rayani vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Jan Mukti Morcha vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Akshay Subhash Tivramkar vs the Collector Thane and Ors.

Sharmila W/O Sandesh Ghuge vs University of Mumbai through Registrar

Prabhanjan Vidyadhar Katre vs the Government of Maharashtra Chief Secretary of Maharashtra

Prakruti Foundation, Chandrapur, Thr. President, Deepak S/O Bharatsingh Dixit and Anr. vs U.O.I., Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Thr. Secretary, New Delhi and Ors.

Jaydeep Shivajirao Shinde and Ors. vs Learned District Collector Satara and

Akaram Santram Patil vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Ministry of Rural Dept. and Ors.

Nirdosh B Bhosale vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Chief Secretary and Ors.

M/S Jay Anand Food Industries Thr. Its Manager vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ganesh Enterprises through Its Authorized Person Shri Pawan Subhash Agrawal vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary

The Union of India Through Deputy Salt Commissioner vs State of Maharashtra

Uddhav Yashwant Dhage Patil vs the State of Maharashtra the. Chief Secretary and Ors.

M/S. Patel Developers vs City and Industrial Development Corp. of Maharashtra Ltd. and Ors.