Pradip Chandrakant Indulkar v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS.

suresh 18-PILG-140.2009.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.140 OF 2009 Pradip Chandrakant Indulkar .... Petitioner Vs.

The State of Maharashtra & Others .... Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NOS.99, 100, 101, 102 WITH IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.140 OF 2009 None present for the Petitioner.

Mr. B.V. Samant, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1, 2 & 5.

Mr. Pritish Oak i/by Mr. A.A. Garge for Respondent No.4.

Mr. Suresh M. Sabrad for the Applicant in all Applications.

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

DATE : NOVEMBER 18, 2019 P.C:

1.

Heard. If the petitioner feels that there are any quarrying activities still going on and which are allegedly illegal, nothing prevents the petitioner from approaching the authorities, including the Collector of Thane District and bringing to his notice the same.

suresh 18-PILG-140.2009.doc 2.

We do not think that we should keep this PIL pending for it was instituted in the year 2009, and from 2009 till date the petitioner has done nothing except creating a rift between the District Collector and the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board as also the District Mining Officer, none of whom seem to be agreeing with each other. In such circumstances, when the affidavit of the District Mining Officer says that out of 402 stone quarries, environmental clearance is granted to 194 stone quarries and the remaining 208 proposals are under process, all the more we feel that the petitioner should pinpoint the illegalities and not pursue this PIL, which is of the year 2009, any further. It is disposed of.

3.

In view of disposal of the PIL, the Civil Applications preferred therein do not survive and they accordingly stand disposed of.

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