Mr. Ganpat Jotiba Karade vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 6154 Bom

                                                                                  PIL 156-2013




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
             PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.  156 OF 2013

Ganpat Jotiba Karade                                                  ..  Petitioner
           V/s
State of Maharashtra & Ors.                                           ..  Respondents

The petitioner in person.
Mr.   A.B.   Vagyani,   Government  Pleader  with Mr.  P.G. Sawant,  AGP, 
Ms. Geetanjali Golatkar, AAGP and Mr. Rohan Sawant, AAGP for the 
State. 
Dr. Siddhartha Priya Ashok for respondent no.2.
Mr. G.S. Hiranandani i/b Mr. C.G. Gavnekar for respondent no.4.
Mr. Sarang Aradhye for respondent no.5.

                                       CORAM:  DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, CJ. & 
                                                   N.M. JAMDAR, J.

                                         DATE    :  16th AUGUST 2017


P.C.:

This PIL is filed expressing certain irregularities as well as malfunctioning of Bharatiya Manav Vikas Trust. Writ Petition No. 9632 of 2015 came to be filed by the said Trust challenging certain directions on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, namely not affording an opportunity of hearing before taking action against the petitioner. Apparently, an Administrator came to be appointed to manage the Trust in question and at that point of time, the writ petition came to be filed complaining that the Trust ought to have been heard before such appointment.

ABS                                                                                      1 of 2





                                                                                    PIL 156-2013

2. It is also pertinent to note that PIL No. 156 of 2013 is filed by one of the parents whose son was a student in the institution run by the Trust. It is also not in dispute that the son of the petitioner was expelled out of the said institution by the management. Apparently, he has not filed any individual writ petition challenging the expulsion of his son from the said institution. On the other hand, he has initiated the present public interest litigation taking the cause of public based on his individual experience in the said institution when his son was sent away from the institution. Writ Petition No. 9632 of 2015 and this Public Interest Litigation No. 156 of 2013 pertain to the same subject matter involving alleged irregularities or malfunctioning of the Trust in question.

3. Review of the order dated 13th April 2017 is sought in Writ Petition No. 9632 of 2015 by the petitioner Trust. Since the review petition has to be considered by the Bench which has passed the said order dated 13th April 2017, both the writ petition and the public interest litigation be placed before the same Bench which has passed the order dated 13th April 2017 in Writ Petition No. 9632 of 2015.

         (N.M. JAMDAR, J.)                                    CHIEF JUSTICE



ABS                                                                                       2 of 2