D. Diamond Apartment vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3216 MP

                                                                    1
                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                                                    BEFORE
                                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU
                                                                       &
                                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S BHATTI
                                                            ON THE 8th OF MARCH, 2022

                                                        WRIT PETITION No. 29058 of 2021

                                            Between:-
                                            D. DIAMOND APARTMENT THR. MEMBER
                                            MUKESH BIRAMGADE S/O SHRI MANNULAL
                                            BIRAMGADE A/A 34 OCCUPATION ADVOCATE
                                            FLAT NO.301 ROYAL DELITE D. DIAMOND SOUTH
                                            CIVIL LINES JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....PETITIONER
                                            (BY SHRI MUKESH BIRAMGARDE, ADVOCATE )

                                            AND

                                     1.     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. ITS
                                            CHAIRMAN/PRESIDENT   REAL     ESTATE
                                            REGULATORY AUTHORITY RERA BHOPAL
                                            (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                     2.     C O L L E C T O R J A B A L P U R DIST.JABALPUR
                                            (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                     3.     MUNICIPAL                  CORPORATION THROUGH
                                            C O M M I S S I O N E R DIST.JABALPUR  (MADHYA
                                            PRADESH)

                                     4.     BUILDING OFFICER MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
                                            DIST.JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                     5.     R . C O N S TR U C TI O N S THROUGH   RAJENDRA
                                            VERMA @ RAJU S/O R.C.VERMA AGE 55 POWER
                                            OF      ATTORNEY         HOLDER DELITE TALKIES
                                            COMPOUND SUBASH CHANDRA BANERJEE WARD
                                            (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                     6.     MAHIB NAYAK S/O LATE R.P.NAYAK , AGED
                                            ABOUT 64 YEARS, ROYAL DELITE TALKIES
                                            COMPOUND    SUBHASH  CHANDRA     WARD
                                            (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                     7.     SMT.SAROJ NAYAK W/O NOT KNOWN ROYAL
                                            DELITE   TALKIES COMPOUND     SUBHASH
                                            CHANDRA WARD (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                              .....RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI AMAN PANDEY, ADVOCATE)

T h is petition coming on for admission this day, JUSTICE SHEEL Signature Not Verified

NAGU passed the following:

  SAN




Digitally signed by NAVEEN NAGDEVE
Date: 2022.03.10 13:01:47 IST                                        ORDER

The present petition shaped as PIL raises the alleged public cause that private respondents are indulging in construction in violation of the provisions of the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and the rules and bylaws framed thereunder.

Learned counsel has also brought on record that there is interse civil dispute pending before the civil court between the contractor who had undertaken the construction and the municipal corporation.

It is settled by the Apex Court in the case of Jaipur Shahar Hindu Vikas Samiti Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others reported in (2014) 5 SCC 530 that where statutory remedy is available for amelioration of the grievance raised in a PIL then a PIL ought not to be entertained. Relevant para 49 of the said judgment is reproduced below for ready reference and convenience:-

49. The concept of public interest litigation is a phenomenon which is evolved to bring justice to the reach of people who are handicapped by ignorance, indigence, illiteracy and other downtrodden people. Through the public interest litigation, the cause of several people who are not able to approach the court is espoused. In the guise of public interest litigation, we are coming across several cases where it is exploited for the benefit of certain individuals. The courts have to be very cautious and careful while entertaining public interest litigation. The judiciary should deal with the misuse of public interest litigation with iron hand. If the public interest litigation is permitted to be misused the very purpose for which it is conceived, namely, to come to the rescue of the poor and downtrodden will be defeated. The courts should discourage the unjustified litigants at the initial stage itself and the person who misuses the forum should be made accountable for it. In the realm of public interest litigation, the courts while protecting the larger public interest involved, should at the same time have to look at the effective way in which the relief can be granted to the people whose rights are adversely affected or are at stake. When their interest can be protected and the controversy or the dispute can be adjudicated by a mechanism created under a particular statute, the parties should be relegated to the appropriate forum instead of entertaining the writ petition filed as public interest litigation.

The petitioner is free to avail remedy under section 307 (5) before the District Judge having territorial jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

With the aforesaid, the PIL stands disposed of without commenting upon merits.

Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by NAVEEN NAGDEVE
Date: 2022.03.10 13:01:47 IST
                                       (SHEEL NAGU)                                                  (MANINDER S BHATTI)
                                           JUDGE                                                           JUDGE

                                     navin




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by NAVEEN NAGDEVE
Date: 2022.03.10 13:01:47 IST