Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Nirav Deepak Modi vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 16 January, 2020

Author: R.I. Chagla

Bench: S.C. Dharmadhikari, R.I. Chagla

suresh                                    903-PILG-107.2009.doc


    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
            CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
      PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.107 OF 2009

Sambhuraje Yuvakranti of Akhil Bhartiya
Maratha Seva Sangh                            .... Petitioner
     Vs.
Tahasildar-Alibaug & Others                   .... Respondents
                        WITH
           CIVIL APPLICATION NO.76 OF 2010
                          IN
      PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.107 OF 2009

Sambhuraje Yuvakranti of Akhil Bhartiya
Maratha Seva Sangh                            .... Petitioner
     Vs.
Tahasildar-Alibaug & Others                   .... Respondents
     And
Jamshed Pesi Cama                             .... Applicant

                        WITH
           CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4 OF 2019
                          IN
      PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.107 OF 2009


Mohan Hirachand Shah                          .... Applicant
     In the matter of:
Sambhuraje Yuvakranti of Akhil Bhartiya
Maratha Seva Sangh                            .... Petitioner
     Vs.
Tahsildar, Alibaug & Others                   .... Respondents
                        WITH
           CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5 OF 2019
                          IN
      PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.107 OF 2009


Directorate of Enforcement                    .... Applicant
      In the matter between:
Shri Sambhuraje Yuvakranti of Akhil

                                                    Page 1 of 6
 suresh                                   903-PILG-107.2009.doc
Bhartiya Maratha Seva Sangh                  .... Petitioner
      Vs.
The Tahasildar - Alibaug & Others            .... Respondents
                         WITH
             WRIT PETITION NO.2692 OF 2000

Bombay Environmental Action Group
And Anr.                                     .... Petitioners
      Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Others                .... Respondents
                         WITH
             WRIT PETITION NO.2235 OF 2010

Jamshed Pesi Cama                            .... Petitioner
      Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Others                .... Respondents
                         WITH
             WRIT PETITION NO.2297 OF 2010

Karuna Abhijit Rajan                         .... Petitioner
     Vs.
The Sub-Divisional Officer & Others          .... Respondents
                         WITH
             WRIT PETITION NO.2541 OF 2010

Nirav Deepak Modi                            .... Petitioner
      Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Others                .... Respondents

Mr. U.B. Nighot for the Petitioner in PIL-107/2009.
Mr. Atul G. Damle, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Netaji
Gawade i/by M/s. Sanjay Udeshi & Co. for the
Petitioner in WP-2235/2010 & CAI-76/2010.
Ms Gauri Godse for the Petitioner in WP-2297/2010.
Mr. P.P. Kakade, GP, with Ms R.A. Salunkhe &
Mr. M.M. Pable, AGPs, for the State in all matters.
Mr. R.V. Govilkar with Mr. N. Prajapati for Respondent
No.6-UoI.

                                                   Page 2 of 6
 suresh                                       903-PILG-107.2009.doc
Ms Sharmila Deshmukh for Respondent No.7.
Mr. Karan Bhosale with Mr. Abhay Arora i/by NDB
Law for Respondent Nos.4 to 7 in WP-2692/2000.

                         CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI &
                                R.I. CHAGLA, JJ.

DATE : JANUARY 16, 2020 P.C:

1. An additional affidavit has been filed by the District Collector, Raigad.
2. He says that the Tahsildar, Alibaug, has submitted a report of demolition of an illegal structure, the details of which are set out in this affidavit, in compliance of the earlier order.
3. There are 16 cases in which permissions are granted and by the Collectorate.
4. The power to grant sanction to review these permissions has been conferred in the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Navi Mumbai. He has granted sanction vide letter dated 24-12-2019.
5. The Collector has assured the Court that the process of reviewing the order will be concluded as expeditiously as possible and after due compliance with the principles of natural justice. Mr. Kakade says that this would be Page 3 of 6 suresh 903-PILG-107.2009.doc done within a period of one month from today. Mr. Kakade's statement, made on instructions, is accepted as an undertaking to this Court.
6. In para 4 of this affidavit tendered today, it is stated that the District Government Pleader was to move applications before the Civil Courts through his Assistants and request the Civil Courts to take up the matters wherein ad-interim/interim orders have been granted in the Civil Suits which are pending.

These Civil Suits are filed by those who apprehended coercive action by the District Collectorate on account of the allegations with regard to unauthorised and illegal construction activities.

7. We find that apart from sending reminders to the District Government Pleader, the Collectorate has done nothing. Equally, the District Government Pleader seems to be casual in his approach to such a serious matter. The District Government Pleader must realise that as and when orders are passed by this Court and of the nature found from the records of these cases, he must be prompt to comply with the same. Every order and direction of this nature binds the State and its officials which include the District Government Pleader. He should not invite an unpleasant action at our end. We remind him that he must move applications through the Assistant Government Pleaders in his office and attached to all Civil Page 4 of 6 suresh 903-PILG-107.2009.doc Courts so that the Civil Courts are then able to perform their duty in accordance with law. Our orders and directions bind all the concerned authorities in the State.

8. If any reference is required, we would invite the attention of the authorities and particularly the officials of the State to the constitutional duty and obligation and which are enshrined in the three clauses to Article 261 of the Constitution of India. The same reads as under:-

"261. Public acts, records and judicial proceedings.- Full faith and credit shall be given throughout the territory of India to public acts, records and judicial proceedings of the Union and of every State.
(2) The manner in which and the conditions under which the acts, records and proceedings referred to in clause (1) shall be proved and the effect thereof determined shall be as provided by law made by Parliament.
(3) Final judgments or orders delivered or passed by civil courts in any part of the territory of India shall be capable of execution anywhere within that territory according to law."

9. It is, therefore, apparent that full faith and credit has to be given throughout the territory of India to public acts, records and judicial proceedings of the Union and of every State. We have reminded the concerned authorities of this constitutional framework so that they realise that when orders of this nature are passed by a Court, they are meant to be implemented and enforced. It is the obligation and duty of the Page 5 of 6 suresh 903-PILG-107.2009.doc officials and other functionaries of the State to implement and enforce these orders and directions and place compliance reports before this Court.

10. In the circumstances, we direct the District Government Pleader to file his personal affidavit of compliance within a period of four (4) weeks from today.

11. List on 13-2-2020.



            (R.I. CHAGLA, J.)                         (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)




           Digitally signed
           by SURESH
SURESH     JAGDISH
JAGDISH    SAJNAWAT
SAJNAWAT   Date:
           2020.01.20
           11:18:51 +0530




                                                                      Page 6 of 6