Bombay High Court
Rajesh Krupashankar Mishra And Another vs State Of Maharashtra, Through Urban ... on 4 December, 2018
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY:
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Public Interest Litigation No. 57 of 2018
[Rajesh Krupashankar Mishra & another Vs. State of Mah., UDD &
others]
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
Mrs. Renuka Sirpurkar, Adv., for the petitioners.
Mr. Deopujari, Govt. Pleader for respondent no.1.
Mr. Sameer Sohoni, Adv., for respondent no.2.
Mr. D. M. Kakani, Adv., for respondent no.3.
Mr. A. R. Deshpande, Adv.,for respondent no.4.
----
CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.
DATE : 04th December, 2018 The petitioners have raised two concerns. One is regarding the manner in which the tender work has been allotted and another is in respect of the objection to the inclusion of areas of twenty-four villages in the Municipal area in which the sewage treatment plant is also going to be set up. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 - Municipal Corporation states that twenty-five percent of the tender work is completed. Fifty per cent of the funds required for the work is to be received from the Central Govt., and expenditure to the extent of twenty-five per cent each of such tender work is to to be borne by the Corporation and State Govt.
We have heard the learned counsel for ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 06:32:20 ::: 2 respondent-Corporation, who has assured to take
necessary steps in respect of the tender work to be undertaken in the areas of twenty-four villages which are now a part of the Corporation area.
Counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that initially, the offers of two tenderers were rejected since they were found on a higher side. Thereafter, at the State-level, the issue was looked into and by a communication dated 13th October, 2017, the Department of Urban Development at the State-level held negotiations and on the conditions stipulated in the said communication, the State decided to accept the offer and accordingly directions were issued by the Urban Development Department to the Collector and Municipal Corporation. This communication is at Annexure-R-2-1, which is annexed with the Written Submissions filed on behalf of Respondent No.2, which are at page 94. A copy of the communication received from the Punjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, is also placed on record. The administration of the said University had proposed to provide another site for setting up a Sewage Treatment Plant. Annexure-R-2-4 is a copy of the said Communication annexed to the Written Submissions of respondent no.2.
Para 7 of the Written Submissions filed on behalf the Corporation reads as under :-
"7. The allegation of the petitioner that there is no space remaining for laying down ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 06:32:20 ::: 3 Underground Sewage System because of newly constructed roads, is incorrect and is, therefore denied. The Municipal Corporation has already left sufficient space for the Underground Sewage System."
The project is to be completed by December, 2019 by the Corporation Authorities. The respondent no.4 submits that the project would be completed. It is submitted by the Corporation that within twenty-four months' time, the allotted work would be completed. Further status be intimated to this Court.
Stand over eight weeks.
Judge Chief Justice
|hedau|
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 06:32:20 :::