Ahmad M. Abdi v. State Of Maharashtra And 10 ORS.(Res) And Pradeep M. Havnur (Applicant)

Sharayu Khot.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS (L.) NO. 352 OF 2018 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 57 OF 2012 Pradeep M. Havnur

...Petitioner

In the matter between Ahmad M. Abdi

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...Respondents

---------- Mr. Datta Mane, for the Applicant.

Mr. Ahmad M. Abdi, the Petitioner in person.

Ms. Geeta Shastri, Addl. G.P., for the Respondent No. 1. Ms. Shital Mane, for the Respondent No. 2-BMC. Mr. Mahesh Londhe, i/by Sanjay Udeshi and Co., for the Respondent No. 4.

Dr. Birendra Saraf a/w Ms. Mallika Tally, i/by S. Mahomedbhai & Co., for the Respondent No. 6.

Mr. Rui Rodrigues, and Mr. N.R. Prajapati and Mr. Dushyant Kumar, for the Respondent No. 9-UoI.

Ms. Shivani Khanna, i/by F & B Associates, for the Respondent No. 10.

1 / 3

Mr. Ajay Fernandes and Ms. Sneha Pandey, i/by Motiwalla and Co., for the Respondent No. 11.

---------- CORAM :

ABHAY S. OKA AND RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.

DATE : 16 August 2018 ORDER :

1.

Not on board. Taken on board.

2.

This Chamber Summons is taken out by a member of the Bar practicing before this Court. His prayer is for intervention in Public Interest Litigation No. 57 of 2012. Our attention is invited to the averments made in the Affidavit in Support. The Applicant is of the view that a particular land is available which is set out in paragraph 5 which could be allotted to the new High Court Complex.

3.

If the Applicant has any suggestions, he can always submit the suggestions to the three Bar Associations which are parties to the Public Interest Litigation. He has also free to give suggestions to the State Government.

2 / 3

4.

The Applicant cannot have locus only because he feels that a particular land which is available in some part of Mumbai Suburban District should be allotted for construction of new High Court Complex.

5.

Subject to what is observed above, there is no case made out to allow intervention by the Applicant. 6.

Accordingly, the Chamber Summons is rejected. [RIYAZ I. CHAGLA J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] 3 / 3