Mr. Vijay Jagganath Mane v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS

hcs pil239.13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.239 OF 2013 Mr. Vijay Jagganath Mane .. Petitioner.

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

.. Respondents.

Mr. Hanumant Govind Wakshe for petitioner.

Mr. P. G. Sawant AGP for Respondent State.

Ms. Urjita Badheka with Mr. Ambika Singh with Ms. Manorama Mohanty i/by S. K. Srivastava and Co for respondent Nos. 7 and 8. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & A.K. MENON, J.

DATED : 8 SEPTEMBER 2015 P.C. :

The above PIL is filed by the PIL petitioner claiming to be social activist and office bearer of a political party. He proclaims that he has nothing to gain personally. The main grievance in the petition is that the work on the Sion Panvel State highway is not being carried out properly, no proper amenities are provided to the workers. He complain that the work is of low quality, resulting in potholes which causes fatal accidents.

2.

The petitioner claims that the respondents including the State of Maharashtra and M/s.Sion Panvel Tollways Pvt. Ltd., the company entrusted with the task of constructing the highway and the contractors must be directed to make arrangement to

pil239.13 provide a parallel services road and provide inter alia ambulance services, medical services and residential arrangements for the workers. The petitioner also demands arrangements to control traffic including fixing of sign boards.

3.

The PIL was filed on 19 November 2013. Much water has flown since. Respondent no.7 which is M/s.Sion Panvel Tollways Pvt. Ltd. have in an affidavit in reply stated that many of the newspapers articles annexed to the petition did not pertain to project and that work of highway has already been completed and being used by public at large.

4.

In view of the fact that the project has been substantially completed and provisional completion certificate is issued on 29.9.2014, in our view there is no occasion now to consider granting any relief sought. We may however observe that respondent no.7 is expected to maintain safety standards on the said road in question. In the circumstances PIL is disposed of. No order as to costs.

(CHIEF JUSTICE) (A.K.MENON, J.)