Bombay High Court
Rupesh Anil Jaiswal vs The State Of Maharashtra on 28 November, 2019
Bench: Prasanna B. Varale, Anil S. Kilor
96.13pil
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.96 OF 2013
Shri. Rupesh s/o Anil Jaiswal ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra & ors. ..RESPONDENTS
Petitioner : party in person
Mr S. P. Sonpawale, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1, 3 & 6;
Mr R. S. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No.2;
Mr S. B. Deshpande, ASGI for respondent No.4;
Mr S. V. Adwant, Advocate for respondent No.5;
Mr D. S. Manorkar, Advocate for respondent No.7;
Mr D. V. Soman, Advocate for respondent No.8;
Mr M. Navandar, Advocate for respondent No.9
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE
AND
ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.
DATE : 28th November, 2019
ORAL ORDER:
In response to our order dated 9th September, 2019, the additional affidavit-in-replies are submitted to this Court. At this stage, we deem it appropriate primarily to consider the response of the Aurangabad City Municipal Corporation by way of the additional affidavit. The additional affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of respondent No.2 - Municipal Commissioner by Shri. Hemant Anand Kolhe, In-charge Executive Engineer, Aurangabad City Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad.
::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2019 02:24:05 :::
96.13pil (2)
2. In our order dated 9th September, 2019, a reference was made to the earlier order dated 19th December, 2018. It may not be out of place to refer to the order dated 28th November, 2018, wherein the Division Bench of this Court made it clear that the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation himself would supervise the progress in the matter of the roads and it is observed that the Commissioner of the Corporation should take over supervision as soon as that there is an approval of tender and he is advised not to entertain interference from anybody of the Corporation thereafter. He is to see that the supervision of the work is done by him personally and only through his team of officers and he will be responsible to this Court. It was further observed by this Court that whatever period is fixed in the work order, that will be strictly adhered to and this Court will over see execution of that work also, so that delay in execution of work is avoided.
3. Now, on the backdrop of the orders dated 28 th November, 2018 and 9th September, 2019, if the additional affidavit-in reply filed through Shri. Hemant Kolhe is perused, it hardly shows any progress in the matter. On the contrary, we find that additional affidavit-in- reply is as vague as it could be. In para 2 of the additional affidavit- in-reply, certain statements are made and the same are reproduced here :-
::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2019 02:24:05 :::
96.13pil (3) "That, in relation to statements made before this Hon'ble Court and accepted as an undertakings to this Hon'ble Court, this deponent respectfully submits that, as per the work order issued to the packagewise contractors 90% work of 6 roads is completed, 19 roads work is in progress and work of 5 roads is yet to be started. Out of 30 roads the said contractor are not finishing the said within a stipulated period as per the terms and the condition of the work order, therefore in this regard deponent had issued notice on 07/09/2019 to all the contractors......."
4. On a specific query put to Mr Deshmukh, learned Counsel for respondent No.2 as to on what basis these statements are made, he sought assistance from the officer of the Corporation, who is present in this Court and in turn, submitted a tabular statement dated 25 th November, 2019 for perusal of this Court. The tabular statement concludes with two notes. These two notes are the broad reasons showing delay caused in the work.
5. Bare perusal of these notes would again show that these reasons are least satisfactory. Be that as it may. We are not considering the issue of the reasons at this stage and we deal with the reasons at appropriate point of time. Coming back to the statement that 90% work of six roads is completed, nineteen roads' work is in progress and work of five roads is yet to be started is concerned, even this ::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2019 02:24:05 ::: 96.13pil (4) statement is not in consonance with the tabular statement submitted before this Court for perusal. In the list of this tabular statement, there are more than 10 works which are shown to have been completed 95%. Thus, there is clear ambiguity in the record of the Corporation itself. In the additional affidavit-in-reply, a reference is made in para 4 in respect of the action to remove encroachments. Though in the tabular statement in para 4, a reference is made at Sr. Nos.6 and 7 to Cidco Bus Stand, Mondha Naka and Seven Hill over bridges and in the remark/action column, it is stated that the work of removal of encroachment is done, it is a common experience that under the Seven Hills over bridge, one may find the area is occupied as a shelter.
6. Then in the additional affidavit-in-reply, a reference is made in respect of initiative for beautification and development of the portion of overbridges. The area under overbridge at Mondha Naka, Aurangabad was taken in adoption for beautification by one of the citizens Shri Avtarsing Sodhi. Work of beautification under the overbridge of Mondha Naka was appreciated by one and all and it may be stated here that the work of Mr Sodhi, who has acted as a good samaritan for the city and it may be stated that considering the work of Mr Sodhi, who has acted as a good samaritan for the city was called upon by this Court to provide certain suggestions. Mr Sodhi submitted that though personally he is not raising any objection for the expenses ::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2019 02:24:05 ::: 96.13pil (5) being borne by him for beautification, as a suggestion, if the expenses are curtailed by positive responsibility by the Corporation, there would be more response for taking up the activity of beautification of the areas under the overbridges. In this regard, Mr Sodhi suggested that if water charges and electricity charges are borne by the Corporation, it would be helpful in curtailing the major financial expenses. Mr Sodhi also submitted before this Court that the Aurangabad City Municipal Corporation floated the scheme for beautification of the areas under
the overbridges and though initially there was a good response, in the passage of time, there was no practical response in the nature of accepting the responsibility by submitting the designs or completing the project either by an individual or the organizational level.
7. Mr Adwant, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.5 submitted before this Court that as per his knowledge, some industrial houses or the organizations of the industrialists are ready to co-operate the Municipal Corporation in the activity of beautification of the areas under the overbridges and certain proposals were also submitted to the Corporation, but for the poor response from the Corporation, these proposals could not be materialized. He further submitted that even today also if the Corporation comes forward, there shall be a positive response from the industrial houses or the organizations of the industrialists or even at individual level. Mr ::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2019 02:24:05 ::: 96.13pil (6) Sodhi who is present in this Court, submitted that half of the area under the Mondha Naka overbridge was handed over to him for beautification and he is ready to beautify even remaining half of the area if the Corporation is ready and willing to show response to him.
8. Considering the ambiguity as referred by us in the additional affidavit-in-reply and the contra statements in the affidavit-in-reply and the tabular statement, we deem it appropriate to have a third party inspection for the convenient exercise of fact finding. Accordingly, we direct the Principal of the Government Engineering College, Aurangabad to depute either the Head of the Department or the senior Lecturer of Civil Engineering branch to visit the works referred to in the tabular statement dated 25th November, 2019, submitted to this Court today and carry out a thorough inspection. The officer so deputed by the Principal to submit his report to this Court within a period of ten days from today.
9. Learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader to communicate the order of this Court to the Principal of Government Engineering College, Aurangabad.
10. We direct Mr Deshmukh, learned Counsel for the Municipal Corporation to file a short affidavit-in-reply insofar as the aspect of ::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2019 02:24:05 ::: 96.13pil (7) beatification is concerned, on the backdrop of the submissions of Mr Adwant, learned Counsel for respondent No.5 in respect of response from the organizations of industrialists or the individuals.
11. The authenticated copy of this order be supplied to Mr Deshmukh, learned Counsel for the Municipal Corporation. In case, the Municipal Corporation is desirous of filing some response to the report, same be filed within a period of four days from receipt of the report.
Post the public interest litigation for further consideration/orders on 12th December, 2019.
(ANIL S. KILOR, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)
sjk
::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2019 02:24:05 :::