Bombay High CourtPIL/89/2016dispossed offdismiss for default

Dr. Sunil Panjabrao Deshmukh v. State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mumbai And Others

2017-07-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice B. P. Dharmadhikari,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Rohit Baban Deo2 pages

26.7PIL.89.16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 89 OF 2016.

(Dr. Sunil Panjabrao Deshmukh .vs. State of Maharashtra & others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

Mr. A.A. Madiwale, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 & 4. Mr. S.G. Jagtap, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 & 3. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & ROHIT B. DEO, JJ. DATED : JULY 26, 2017.

Shri P.S. Patil, learned Advocate for petitioner is not available and adjournment is being sought. We have heard Mr. A.A. Madiwale, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 & 4 and Mr. S.G. Jagtap, learned Advocate for respondent nos. 2 & 3. Respondent nos. 1 & 4 have not filed any reply. Grievance of petitioner, sitting M.L.A. is about backlog in irrigation sector in Amravati revenue division. Cognizance has been taken in public interest by this Court. Respondent nos. 2 & 3 have filed reply. They have pointed out constitution of a Special Committee vide Government Resolution dated 27.3.2015 to look into the backlog and to take necessary steps. This reply has been filed by respondent nos. 2 & 3 on 16.9.2016. Petitioner thereafter has not filed any rejoinder. The Committee thus constituted on 27.3.2015, therefore, has to meet regularly, transact business and monitor development in irrigation sector and also to take remedial steps to remove backlog. There

26.7PIL.89.16 is nothing on record to show that the Committee is not discharging these duties.

We grant petitioner opportunity to approach again if Committee has not met in last two months or its meeting is not scheduled in near future. If the petitioner is not satisfied with working of the Committee, again he can make grievance in this respect. With this liberty to the petitioner and keeping all these contentions open in view of the above G.R. dated 27.3.2015, we dispose of the present P.I.L.

Judge Judge J.