Disposed¶28

Manohar S/O Narayan Shinde v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Sept 2025PIL/97/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Koyna Project irregularities PIL disposed; Public Interest Litigation 97 of 2012 Kolhapur Circuit Bench; writ of mandamus high power committee experts; inquiry against responsible Officers; Stage IV and Stage IV-B not completed; fact finding report dated 16 February 2015 Principal Secretary (W.R.) Water Resources Department taken on record; Order sheet 4 May 2017 Advocate absent adjourned; purpose of PIL served; grievance against fact finding report via appropriate remedies; petition disposed off 25 September 2025; Karnik & Deshmukh JJ.; petitioner unrepresented; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Having regard to the reliefs prayed for, the purpose of filing the P.I.L. is served in view of the fact finding report already on record. ¶23

Manohar S/O Narayan Shinde Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

10-Pil-97-2012.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 97 OF 2012

¶5

Manohar s/o. Narayan Shinde … Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents

¶6

None for the Petitioner.

¶7

Ms. T.J. Kapre, A.G.P. for the Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Prabhakar M. Jadhav a/w. Mr. Rutik A. Kashik for Respondent No.4.

¶8

——————

¶9

Coram : M. S. Karnik & Sharmila U. Deshmukh, JJ. Date : 25^th September 2025.

¶10

P. C. :

¶11

1. None for the Petitioner.

¶12

2. This P.I.L. is filed for the following reliefs :

¶13

a) Issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction directing the Respondent No.1 to constitute a high power committee including experts for investigating the irregularities occurred in Koyna Project and further direct to the committee to submit its report to this Hon'ble Court;

¶14

1 of 3

¶15

osk

¶16

10-Pil-97-2012.doc

¶17

b) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent No.1 to initiate inquiry against the responsible Officers, who are responsible for the irregularities occurred in the Koyna Project and take strict action against them;

¶18

c) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to complete the projects i.e. Stage IV and Stage IV-B, which are not completed till date,

¶19

d) Costs of this petition be awarded to the Petitioner,

¶20

e) For such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case.

¶21

3. A fact finding report dated 16^th February 2015 has already been taken on record of this Court. This fact finding report was submitted by the Principal Secretary (W.R.), Water Resources Department, after hearing the Petition in connection with the subject under reference.

¶22

4. As per the last Order sheet dated 4^th May 2017, though the Petitioner was present before the Court, his Advocate was absent. The matter was therefore adjourned.

¶23

5. Having regard to the reliefs prayed for in the Petition, in our opinion, the purpose of filing the P.I.L. is served in view of the fact finding report. If the Petitioner has any grievance as regards the fact finding report, he may resort to appropriate remedies, as may be permissible under the law.

¶24

2 of 3

¶25

osk

¶26

10-Pil-97-2012.doc

¶27

6. We do not propose to keep the P.I.L., which is of the year 2012, pending any further.

¶28

7. Petition is disposed off.

¶29

[ Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. ] [ M. S. Karnik, J. ]

¶30

Digitally signed by OMKAR SHIVAHAR OMKAR KUMBHAKARN SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Date: 2025.09.29 11:58:44 +0530

¶31

3 of 3

¶32

osk

Manohar S/O Narayan Shinde v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manohar S/O Narayan Shinde v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

Similar cases

Pramod Raju Ratan Patil vs State of Maharashtra

Sharad Ghodke vs State of Maharashtra Throu. Is Principal Sec. Dept of Urban Development and Ors.

Conscious Citizen Forum Non-Governmental Organization Throu. Kumar Kamlesh vs State of Maharashtra Thru. Urban Development Dept and and Ors.

Bashid Shafik Chikhalekar vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Prin. Revenue Sec, Revenue Dept. and Ors.

Ramdas Suryabhan Khade vs Union of India Thro. the Secretary Ministry of Railways Ministry of Railway

Rajesh Sharma vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Secretary and Ors.

Rajesh Sharma vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Secretary and Ors.

Satya Shodhak Samaj Sangh through Its Trustee Member Vishwasrao Bhaskarrao Patil vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Chief Secretary and Others

Dr. Girish Vitthal Shiralkar and Anr. Vs Zilla Parishad and Anr.

Riyaz Dilavar Shaikh and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rajvardhan Patil and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ashok Shankar Bhagat Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. District Collectro Sangli and Ors.

Courts on Its Own Motion Vs Agricultural Products Market Committee, Satara and Ors.

Dr. Vivek Monteiro and Ors. Vs Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited and Ors.