Bombay High Court
Ashish S/O Charandas Wasnik vs The Nagpur Improvement Trust, ... on 30 March, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
wp2539.16-Judgment 1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.2539 OF 2012
PETITIONER :- Ashish S/o Charandas Wasnik
Age 39 years, Occupation - Advocate,
R/o Plot No.22, High Court Society,
ig Nr. SBI (Jaiprakash Nagar) Br., Nagpur-25.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :- 1) The Nagpur Improvement Trust,
Through its Chairman, Civil Lines, Nagpur.
2) The Collector,
Collector Office, Civil Lines, Nagpur.
3) The High Court Ministerial Officers
Cooperative Housing Society,
Through its Secretary, Plot No.26,
Kotwal Nagar, Nagpur.
4) Nandkishore S/o Bhaiyyalal Gupta,
Age - 80 years, Occupation - retired,
R/o Bhaiyyalal Wadi, Near Sitanagar,
Nagpur-25.
5) Govinda S/o Bhiwaji Sawarkar,
Age - major, Occupation - agriculturist,
R/o Khapri, Post - Takalghat,
Tahsil Hingna, Nagpur.
6) Umaji S/o Gangaram Ashtankar,
Age - major, Occupation - agriculturist,
R/o Takia, Dhantoli, Nagpur.
::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 11:02:29 :::
wp2539.16-Judgment 2/5
7) Namdeo S/o Gangaram Ashtankar,
Age - major, Occupation - not known,
R/o Takia, Dhantoli, Nagpur.
Through LRs
7A) Shri Dadarao S/o Namdeo Ashtankar
Aged about 46 years, Occupation - service,
R/o Takiya, Dhantoli, Nagpur.
7B) Shri Moreshwar S/o Namdeo Ashtankar
ig Aged about 38 years, Occupation - service,
R/o Takiya Dhantoli, Nagpur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Petitioner in person.
Mr.R.O. Chhabra, Counsel for the Respondent No.1.
Mr.Anand Parchure, Counsel for the Respondent No.3.
Mr.N.R. Rode, Asst.Government Pleader for the Respondent No.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK &
V. M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED : MARCH 30, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
By this writ petition, the the petitioner seeks a direction to
the respondent-Nagpur Improvement Trust and the other Government
authorities for removal the illegal construction on the area that is
required to be utilized for the open space adjoining to the flat of the
petitioner.
wp2539.16-Judgment 3/5
It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that several illegal
structures were constructed on the land meant for open space and
despite the complaints by the petitioner, the respondents-authorities did
not remove the encroachment.
Shri N.R. Rode, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2 and Shri R.O. Chhabra, the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 state that
during the pendency of the writ petition, in view of the orders passed by
this Court from time to time, all the encroachments on the open space,
except the construction made by the respondent No.5, have been
removed. It is stated that that the structure erected by the respondent
No.5 cannot be demolished and no action could be taken for removal of
the said structure as the Civil Court has granted a permanent injunction
in favour of the respondent No.5 and restrained the Nagpur
Improvement Trust from taking any action in pursuance of the notice
issued by the Nagpur Improvement Trust to the respondent No.5 for
removal of the structure. It is stated that it is held by the Civil Court in
the suit filed by the respondent No.5 that the respondent No.5 is the
wp2539.16-Judgment 4/5
owner of certain land and hence, no action can be initiated against the
respondent No.5. In the circumstances of the case, since all other
encroachments and structures have been removed, the learned counsel
for the respondents seek the dismissal of the writ petition.
On hearing the petitioner in person and the learned
counsel for the respondents, it appears that the grievance of the
petitioner stands redressed substantially in view of the removal of the
illegal structures and encroachment on the plot that was meant to be
utilized as a open space. The grievance of the petitioner in regard to
the non-removal of the structure erected by the respondent No.5 cannot
be redressed, as it is clear from a reading of the judgment passed by the
Civil Court in the suit filed by the respondent No.5 and confirmed by
this Court in the second appeal, that the respondent No.5 is the owner
of the plot and the Nagpur Improvement Trust is permanently
restrained from taking any action against the respondent No.5, in
pursuance of the notice that was challenged in the Civil Court. In the
circumstances of the case, a direction cannot be issued against the
respondent Nagpur Improvement Trust to remove the structure erected
by the respondent No.5. The Nagpur Improvement Trust is, however,
wp2539.16-Judgment 5/5
free to take appropriate action against the respondent No.5, if
permissible in law.
In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the writ petition
with no order as to costs.
Rule stands discharged.
JUDGE JUDGE
!! BRW !!
