Rahul Rajendraprasad Tiwari v. Mumbai Cricket Association And 3 ORS

Trupti 25-pil-38-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 38 OF 2022 WITH IN PERSON APPLICATION (L) NO. 27329 OF 2021 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 38 OF 2022 Mr. Rahul Rajendraprasad Tiwari ...

Petitioner versus Mumbai Cricket Association and Others ...

Respondents ......

Mr. Rahul R. Tiwari, Petitioner-in-Person present. Mr.A.S.Khandeparkar, Senior Advocate with Mr.V.V.Warerkar i/b. Warerkar & Warerkar for Respondent No.1. Ms. Priyanka Desai with Mr. Jaideep Singh Khatta and Mr. Rohit Balani i/b. The Fort Circle for Respondent No.2. Mr. Milind More, Addl. GP for Respondent No.4-State. ......

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR, ACJ & SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

DATE : 7 JUNE 2023 P.C.:

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

The Petitioner seeks to espouse the cause of the cricket players as to direct Respondent No. 1 - Mumbai Cricket Association and

Trupti 25-pil-38-2022.doc Respondent No. 2 - Board of Control for Cricket in India to provide pure and drinkable water and other facilities to the players during the practice match/ unofficial matches on public grounds. Further directions regarding the facilities for women players are also sought.

3.

The Petitioner is a practicing Advocate. There is no reason given why this class, the players, cannot seek redressal of their grievance on their own. In these circumstances, the appropriate course of action would be to call upon Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to consider the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) as suggestions made and if it is feasible for them to do so, proceed to implement the same. We make it clear that our order is not to be construed as direction to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to grant relief as sought for by the Petitioner but only as suggestions.

4.

The PIL is accordingly disposed of.

5.

We, however, clarify that if and when this cause is raised by any aggrieved player, the same will be considered on its own merits. 6.

In view of disposal of the PIL, pending application is disposed of.

( SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)