Stri Shakti Kendra And 6 ORS. v. Union Of India And 14 ORS. And Laqccerate Fleet Services Pvt. Ltd. (Prop. Resp.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 117 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 753 OF 2012 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 753 OF 2012 Stri Shakti Kendra and Ors.

} Petitioners versus Union of India and Ors.

} Respondents Mr.Arif Doctor with Mr.Kalpesh Joshi and Ms.Nisha Shah i/b. M/s.Kalpesh Joshi and Associates for the petitioners/applicants.

Mr.G.Hariharan i/b. Mr.Gul Ansari for respondent no.1.

Mr.S.B.Gore-AGP for State.

Dr.Birendra Saraf with Ms.Shoma Maitra and Mr.Nikhil Apte i/b. M/s.Wadia Ghandy and Co for respondent no.10.

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & G. S. PATEL, JJ.

DATED :- JUNE 12, 2019 P.C. :- 1.

Heard both sides.

2.

So long as there is a facility and a counter so also parking lot provided so as to enable the passengers arriving at the domestic and international airport to book prepaid taxis,

particularly those operated by women and under the auspices of the applicant before us, we do not think that in writ jurisdiction we can ensure a regular flow of passengers towards the applicants nor can we probe into the grievances and complaint made on their behalf by Mr.Doctor that the officers of the Mumbai International Airport Limited are not directing their employees or agents to divert the passengers' traffic towards the applicants or apprising them about the facility made available by the applicants. Such grievances, if result in financial loss, can be a subject matter of distinct legal proceedings. It is not the grievance of the applicants that no facility has been made available or there is no counter which gives information to the arriving public that such taxis, operated exclusively by women, are parked outside the terminal.

3.

We do not think that in writ jurisdiction all such matters should be looked into any further. Eventually, these are matters of policies and policies may undergo change or modification from time to time. If the grievances are that these ideal are not framed or better policies could have been devised, then, they should be raised before the concerned statutory authorities. Writ jurisdiction is not an appropriate remedy.

4.

The writ petition and the notice motion both are dismissed. There would be no order as to costs.

(G.S.PATEL, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)