Bombay High Court
Courts On Its Own Motion vs Msedcl Offices, Maha. State ... on 16 September, 2019
Author: S.B. Shukre
Bench: S.B. Shukre
pil70.17.odt 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No.70 OF 2017
(Court on its own motion Vs. MSEDCL Offices, Mahadeorao State Electricity Distribution
Company Ltd., Mumbai and others)
__________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, Advocate as Amicus Curiae.
Shri Shashibhushan Wahane, Advocate for Intervenors.
Ms. T.H. Khan, AGP for Respondent Nos.1,2,10,11,12&13
Shri S.V. Purohit, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
Shri A.M. Quazi, Advocate for Respondent No.4.
Shri P.S. Khare, Advocate for Respondent No.6.
Shri Kunte, Advocate for Respondent Nos.7&10.
Shri S.M. Puranik, Advocate for Respondent No.8.
Shri Anjan De, Advocate for Respondent No.14.
Shri U.M. Aurangabadkar, ASGI for Respondent Nos.15&16.
Shri P.B. Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.18.
Shri S.R. Bhangade, Advocate for Respondent No.19.
CORAM : Sunil B. Shukre & Milind N. Jadhav, JJ.
DATE : 16th September, 2019.
Today, some of the applicants in the intervention application being Civil Application No.1168/2017 have filed an application bearing Stamp No. Civil Application (O) ST No.18799/2019 seeking modification of the order passed by this Court on 28th August, 2019 giving permission to the authority to demolish the unauthorized constructions existing within the restricted zones of the high tension electrical lines including Armor Township.
The intervention application No.1168/2017 has been filed by 18 persons and it is yet to be decided. The application filed today is moved by 11 persons, out of whom two are not parties to Civil Application No.1168/2017. Shri ::: Uploaded on - 17/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 18/09/2019 01:23:40 ::: pil70.17.odt 2/3 Shailesh Narnavare, learned counsel appearing for 11 persons filing application today submits that he does not appear for the applicants in intervention application No.1168/2017 and that he would seek instructions from those applicants to file his vakalatnama even in that application. Unless and until the intervention application is appropriately decided, this Court cannot take cognizance of the application filed today. Even otherwise, Shri S.M. Puranik, learned counsel for respondent No.8 submits that notices calling upon removal of unauthorized constructions have been issued to these applicants and also others on 17 th July, 2019 thereby giving each of the noticees five weeks clear time to remove those unauthorized constructions and thus the Nagpur Municipal Corporation has complied with mandatory requirements of the provisions of Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act. When asked by this Court specifically as to whether or not any affidavit has been filed by these applicants about their constructions being in conformity with the sanctioned plan and also not in violation of the DCR Rules, learned counsel for the applicants answered as in the negative. Even in today's application no statement has been made on behalf of these applicants that their respective constructions are in conformity with the sanctioned plan and DCR Rules.
If one goes through the intervention application No.1168/2017, one would find that these applicants have a grievance basically against the builder who appears to have taken these applicants for a ride by providing them with incorrect and misleading information. In such a scenario, prima facie, we are of the view that if any remedy such applicants would have available in law, it would be not before ::: Uploaded on - 17/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 18/09/2019 01:23:40 ::: pil70.17.odt 3/3 this Court, but elsewhere, may be the Civil Court. It appears to us that such remedy has not been availed of by these applicants. In any case, this remedy would not extend beyond seeking compensation from the erring builder and it cannot be used for perpetuating an apparent illegality which has taken place in this case. If such an illegality is allowed to be continued, human life would be in grave danger and one need not say that human life is precious and not the property which is the creation of humans, and which can always be recreated or reconstructed, if the need arises, which is not so when human life is lost.
In view of above, the application filed today cannot be entertained by us till the time the Civil Application No.1168/2017 is appropriately decided by this Court.
We grant liberty to Shri Shailesh Narnavare, learned counsel for the applicant in Civil Application (O) St. No.1879/2019 to file his vakalatnama on behalf of the intervenors-applicants, if any, on or before the next date.
Meanwhile, we grant liberty to the respondent No.8-Nagpur Municipal Corporation and also the concerned authorities to go ahead with the demolition plan, by following due procedure of law.
Stand over to 18th September, 2019.
JUDGE JUDGE
DWW
::: Uploaded on - 17/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 18/09/2019 01:23:40 :::