Bombay High Court
Uttamrao Rambhaji Shelke vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 10 June, 2022
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka, S. G. Mehare
1 pil 98.21
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 98 OF 2021
Uttamrao Rambhaji Shelke .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Ms. Pradnya Talekar, Advocate h/f Talekar and Associates,
Advocate for the Petitioner.
Shri D. R. Kale, Incharge G. P. for Respondent No. 1.
Shri A. S. Bajaj, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2.
Shri P. R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate h/f shri S. N. Gaikwad,
Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.
Shri Rahul A. Tambe, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4, 6 to 9 &
13.
Shri Mazhar A. Jahagirdar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 5.
Shri R. R. Karpe, Advocate for the Respondent No. 10.
Shri A. V. Hon, Advocate for the Respondent No. 14.
WITH
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 100 OF 2021
Nikhil Manohar Dorle .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Shri Devang Deshmukh, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Shri D. R. Kale, Incharge G. P. for Respondent No. 1.
Shri A. S. Bajaj, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.
Shri P. R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate h/f shri S. N. Gaikwad,
Advocate for the Respondent No. 4.
Shri Mazhar A. Jahagirdar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 8.
Shri Rahul A. Tambe, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 9.
CORAM : R. D. DHANUKA AND
S. G. MEHARE, JJ.
DATE : 10TH JUNE, 2022.
::: Uploaded on - 10/06/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 12/06/2022 04:40:51 :::
2 pil 98.21
ORDER :
. PIL No. 98 of 2021 along with PIL No. 100 of 2021 are
placed on board for direction pursuant to the praecipe filed by
the State Government to place on record subsequent events took
place after closure of the matters for pronouncement of
judgment. Learned Government Pleader states that, by the
notification dated 01st June, 2022 issued by the State
Government, the State Government has appointed/nominated six
members which were remained to be appointed as trustees on
Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust Shirdi.
2. The application filed by way of praecipe to consider
subsequent events has been vehemently opposed by the learned
counsel for the petitioner in PIL No. 98 of 2021 on the ground
matter is already closed for pronouncement of judgment. The
learned counsel for the petitioner in PIL No. 98 of 2021 also
invited our attention to the order dated 30 th November, 2021
passed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.
17200-17203 of 2021 filed by the petitioners in PIL No. 98 of
2021 and would submit that order passed by the Division Bench
of this Court pursuant to which notification has been issued and
relied by the State Government dated 14th October, 2021 has
been stayed.
3. In view of the fact that after hearing the parties at great
length, this Court has closed the matters for pronouncement of
judgment on 21.04.2022, we do not propose to allow the parties to
3 pil 98.21
make additional submissions or to implead the new appointed
trustees on record at this stage.
4. If the petitioners in PIL propose to challenge the
notification dated 01st June, 2022, they would be at liberty to do
so. These subsequent events cannot postpone the
pronouncement of judgment.
5. We accordingly make it clear that we do not propose to
bring these additional facts on record and to rehear the matters
at this stage. The roster of this bench has already been changed.
It would also cause inconvenience to the parties and this bench,
if the matter is required to be reheard on the additional factual
aspects.
6. The parties are at liberty to file appropriate proceedings in
so far as notification dated 01st June, 2022 is concerned.
[ S. G. MEHARE J.] [R. D. DHANUKA, J.]
bsb/June 22
