Rayat Vikas Aghadi, Through President, Shri. Raghunath Shripati Patil v. Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Maharashtra, And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 141 OF 2014 Rayat Vikas Aghadi, Through President, Shri.
Raghunath Shripati Patil ... Petitioner
Versus
Chief Secretary, Govt of Maharashtra, And Ors ... Respondents ------ None for the Petitioner.
Ms. T. J. Kapre, AGP for the Respondent-State. ------ Coram : M. S. Karnik & Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ.
Date : December 11, 2025.
ORAL ORDER: (PER: M. S. KARNIK, J.) 1.
None for the Petitioner.
2.
With the assistance of the learned AGP, we have perused the memo of the Public Interest Litigation along with the relevant exhibits. The Petitioner has prayed for the following substantive reliefs: "a) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ, direction or order to quash and set aside the impugned order of cancellation of 39 development works in Sangli District as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional being violative of Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India and also as violative of principle of natural justice and principle of equality.
(b) To issue further orders or directives to the Respondent to immediately complete the Contract procedure issue the work order to start the work.
1 of
(c) Pending the hearing and inal disposal of this writ petition it is just and necessary in the interest of justice that Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the impugned order of cancellation of 39 development works which was issued by Respondent No.3 on 30.12.2013 and further relevant and Mandatory orders or directions be issued to the said respondent to start the works immediately." 3.
It is the grievance of the Petitioner that the sanction of funds for Shirala granted is illegally cancelled by the State Government. The aidavit-in-reply reveals that the State Government has granted funds for providing basic amenities in rural areas within the State of Maharashtra. These funds are released for utilization towards basic amenities in rural areas, based on the demands received from the public representatives of the concerned area. 4.
The grievance of the PIL Petitioner is that the State Government has repeatedly taken the stand that funds have been granted for the development of basic amenities in the districts of Sangli and Kolhapur in Maharashtra. By an order dated 4th March 2014, the State Government sanctioned an amount of ₹1,83,00,000/- for providing basic amenities in Sangli District. On the same date, another order was issued sanctioning an amount of ₹3,09,30,000/- for providing basic amenities in Kolhapur District.
5.
The stand of the State Government is that, on the basis of representations received from public representatives, it is undertaking 2 of
phase-wise development of rural areas in the State of Maharashtra. The State Government has thus adopted the stance that the development of rural areas is being carried out in a phased manner. 6.
The State Government then says that basic facilities are being provided to the people of Shirala Taluka. It is stated that the Government has the discretion to cancel the earlier sanction granted for 39 development works in Shirala Taluka. The aidavit further records that the State Government is committed to providing basic amenities in rural areas and has been regularly sanctioning funds for such developmental activities, as the process is a continuous one. 7.
For the year 2014-2015, the State Government by an order dated 1st August, 2014 sanctioned an amount of ₹3,02,00,000/- to be utilized for the development of basic amenities in Shirala Taluka, Sangli District.
8.
The present Petition was iled in 2014, alleging nonimplementation of 39 development works in Shirala Taluka, Sangli District. However, in its aidavit-in-reply, the State Government has placed on record a copy of the order dated 1st August 2014, sanctioning ₹3,02,00,000/- for Shirala Taluka. The allegations therefore pertain to inancial allocation, which is essentially a policy decision of the State Government. We ind that the State Government has already taken a decision to sanction an amount of ₹3,02,00,000/- for Shirala 3 of
Taluka, Sangli District after iling of this Petition. The purpose of iling the Petition is hence serve.
9.
With the passage of time, the requirements for providing basic amenities may have increased. The issue for increase in allocation will obviously be considered by the State Government considering the overall circumstances.
10.
It is always open for the Petitioner to approach the public representatives or the State Government by placing relevant data on record regarding the basic requirements of the area, which the State Government is bound to consider in accordance with its policy. 11.
With the aforesaid observation, Public Interest Litigation is disposed of.
[ Ajit B. Kadethankar, J. ] [ M. S. Karnik, J. ] Digitally signed by TALLE SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO Date:
2025.12.17 14:44:05 +0530 TALLE SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO 4 of