Ketan Tirodkar v. Hon'Ble Chief Minister, Maharashtra Through The State Of Maharashtra
cripil-2.12 pmw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 2 OF 2012 Ketan Tirodkar
...Petitioner
Versus
Hon'ble Chief Minister, Maharashtra through the State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
Dr. F.R. Shaikh, APP for the Respondent - State. CORAM : A.S. OKA & C.V. BHADANG, JJ.
DATE : 24th FEBRUARY, 2016 P.C.
1.
On the last date, time was granted to the learned Advocate representing the Petitioner to address the Court. Today, none appears for the Petitioner. In terms of the order dated 8th and 9th October, 2015, a Committee headed by Shri Justice J.A. Patil, a Retired Judge of this Court was constituted by the State Government. The Committee has submitted its report and recommendations. There is an affidavit dated 27th January, 2016 filed by Shri Kamalakar Bhagwanrao Phand, Additional Collector and Competent Authority (ULC), Brihanmumbai. We accept the statements made in the said affidavit in paragraphs 2 and
6. In view of the statements made in the affidavit of Shri Kamalakar B.
cripil-2.12 Phand and considering the limited prayers made in the Petition, it is not necessary to issue any further directions in this Criminal PIL. If the Petitioner has any grievance regarding the failure of the State Government to comply with the assurance given to this Court or failure of the State Government to take lawful action on the basis of the report or the recommendations of the Committee, it is for him to make such grievance before the Appropriate Authority of the State Government. 2.
There is also an affidavit filed by Mr. Shriram Yadav, the Deputy Secretary, Urban Development Department stating that in the light of the suggestions made by the Committee in paragraph 28 of the report, the State Government is going to frame a policy on the lines suggested in the report. It is also stated that in case of double allotment in 2% quota, a copy of the inquiry report is forwarded to the Housing Department for further action. Needless to state that the Housing Department is bound to take action in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible on the basis of the inquiry report. 3.
Subject to what is observed above, the PIL is disposed of. We may further make it clear that we have made no adjudication as regards the legality and correctness of the conclusions drawn by the Committee headed by Shri Justice J.A. Patil (Retd.). (C.V. BHADANG, J ) (A.S. OKA, J )