Pradnya Sanjay Kulkarni v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others
{1} pil10014.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD PUBLIC INTERST LITIGATION NO.100 OF 2014 Sou. Pradnya w/o Sanjay Kulkarni Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & others Respondents Mr.S.V.Natu, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.S.B.Yawalkar, A.G.P. for Respondents No.1 & 2. Mr.U.B.Bondar, advocate for Respondents No.3 & 4. Mr.S.S.Thombre, advocate for Respondents No.5 & 6. CORAM : DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, CJ. AND R.M.BORDE, J.
DATE : 28th June, 2017.
P.C. :
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.P. for RespondentState, as well as learned Counsel for Village Panchayat and Zilla Parishad.
The grievance seems to be with regard to implementation of water supply scheme under the title, "Rashtriya Pey Jal Yojana" in village Viha Mandva, Tq. Paithan, District Aurangabad.
According to the petitioner, though funds were allocated to RespondentVillage Panchayat to complete the water supply scheme, in the half way, the said work was discontinued. According to the Zilla Parishad, they have temporarily arranged the water supply scheme to the said village. However, grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of two authorities undertaking the project, there is no permanent solution of water supply to the said
{2} pil10014.odt village. The issue would be how much money was allocated to Respondents - Village Panchayat as well as Zilla Parishad and whether they have completed the work equally to the funds received by them since the allegation is with regard to misappropriation of the funds.
In the light of above circumstances, we are of the opinion that public money meant for a particular purpose ought to have been utilised properly for the said purpose. By delaying the work, apart from disadvantage of non implementation of the scheme suffered by the villagers, the cost of project would also go up, which would again burden the public exchequer. In that view of the matter, the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, shall enquire into the matter on the representation of the petitioners to be submitted within two weeks from today. Such representation shall be disposed of after discreet inquiry within two months from the date of receipt of representation.
In the light of above directions, petition is disposed of. It is needless to say that ultimately the project, for which funds were released, has to be implemented and see that permanent solution of water supply to the village is explored since the distance seems to be within 30 Kms from Jayakwadi Water Reservoir.
R.M.BORDE, J.
CHIEF JUSTICE adb/pil10014