Bombay High Court
Qaneez E Fatemah Sukhrani And Anr vs Pune Municipal Corporation Thr Its ... on 18 December, 2023
21-PIL.88.2023
Jvs.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 88 OF 2023
Qaneez E Fatemah Sukhrani & Anr. } Petitioners
versus
Pune Municipal Corporation & Ors. } Respondents
Ms. Ronita Bhattacharya-Bector for the petitioners.
Mr. R. M. Pethe for Pune Municipal Corporation.
Mr. P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader with Mr. O. A.
Chandurkar, Additional Government Pleader and Ms.R.
A. Salunkhe, AGP for respondents 2 to 4 (State).
CORAM: DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. &
ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATE: 18th DECEMBER 2023
P.C.:
1. Heard Ms. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Mr. Pethe, learned counsel representing Pune
Municipal Corporation (PMC).
2. This PIL petition primarily concerns itself with non-
implementation of the recommendations made by the Standard
Technical Advisory Committee and Road Development and Road
Maintenance Committee, which have been formed by the
Municipal Commissioner, PMC for making recommendations on
technical issues.
3. Our attention has been drawn to a judgment of a
coordinate Bench of this Court, dated 24th February 2018/12th
21-PIL.88.2023
April 2018 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 71 of 2013,
whereby various directions have been issued to the State
authorities as also to the authorities of Municipal Corporations.
One of the directions issued by the Division Bench in the said
judgment is that the State Government shall issue necessary
directions to the authorities which do not have the benefit of
expertise of the Committees like Standard Technical Advisory
Committee as is available in Municipal Corporation of Greater
Mumbai (MCGM). Submission, thus, is that what the Court
intended by issuing the said directions vide judgment dated 24 th
February 2018/12th April 2018 is that the Municipal Corporations
shall act upon the recommendations of the Standard Technical
Advisory Committee which comprises of experts. Similar view
has been expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioners in
respect of the recommendations made by the Road
Development and Road Maintenance Committee formed by PMC
which again is Committee comprising of experts.
4. We do not see any reason for the authorities of PMC not to
act upon and implement the recommendations made by the
Standard Technical Advisory Committee and the Road
Development and Road Maintenance Committee. As already
observed above, the Committees have been formed by the
Municipal Corporation itself and are adequately equipped to
tender recommendations/advise on technical issues.
5. An affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of PMC stating
therein, inter alia, that the recommendations being made by
these two Committees are being implemented.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners draws our attention to
various averments made in the affidavit in reply filed by PMC
21-PIL.88.2023
and points out that the said recommendations have not been
implemented in letter and spirit.
7. We appreciate the statement made by Mr. Pethe, learned
counsel representing PMC that the Municipal Corporation does
not treat this matter as an adversarial litigation and shall
cooperate and take appropriate steps to implement the
recommendations made by the Standard Technical Advisory
Committee and the Road Development and Road Maintenance
Committee.
8. Written submissions have been tendered to the court by
the learned counsel for the petitioners, which are taken on
record. The said submissions contain certain suggestions. We,
thus, direct that learned counsel representing PMC shall
examine the said written submissions and seek instructions from
the authority/authorities of PMC concerned so that this PIL
petition may be disposed of with appropriate directions which
may be needed considering the status of implementation of the
recommendations of the aforementioned two Committees.
Learned counsel for the PMC will, thus, file a note in
reply/written submissions duly signed by some responsible
officer of PMC by the next date of listing.
9. It has been stated at the Bar that at present both the
aforesaid Committees, namely, Standard Technical Advisory
Committee and Road Development and Road Maintenance
Committee, for some reason, are not functional. We, thus, direct
the Commissioner, PMC to take requisite steps and ensure that
these two Committees become functional within 3 (three) weeks
from today. In case for some reason the Municipal
Commissioner is unable to make these Committees functional
21-PIL.88.2023
during this period, it will be open to the Municipal Commissioner
to seek further time by making appropriate application to the
Court citing reasons.
10. Stand over to 24th January 2024.
11. This order shall be communicated to the Municipal
Commissioner, PMC by the learned counsel representing PMC
forthwith.
JAYANT
VISHWANATH
SALUNKE
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
