✦ Bombay High Court · 18 Jun 2008

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.71 OF 2006 PUBLIC Akhil Bharat Krishi Go-Seva Sangh & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 11. This petition is filed in public interest seeking an order for restraining Respondent Nos.1 to 5 from, in any manner, proceeding with the setting up construction, commissioning and operating the slaughter house on lands bearing Gat Nos.13/1A, 13/1B 222 and 13/1C at village Mulegaon…

Judgment

Mr.C.U.Kamdar with Mr.K.K.Tated for the petitioners. Mr.P.M.Patil, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr.U.B.Naik for Respondent No.3. Mr.Abhay L. Patki for Respondent Nos.4 and 5. Mr.A.K.Sexena for Respondent No.6. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI & : BILAL NAZKI & CORAM CORAM : BILAL NAZKI & S.S.SHINDE, JJ., JJ., S.S.SHINDE, S.S.SHINDE, JJ., DATED : JUNE 18, 2008. : JUNE 18, 2008. DATED DATED : JUNE 18, 2008. P.C. P.C.P.C.

#1. This petition is filed in public interest seeking an order for restraining Respondent Nos.1 to 5 from, in any manner, proceeding with the setting up construction, commissioning and operating the slaughter house on lands bearing Gat Nos.13/1A, 13/1B 222 and 13/1C at village Mulegaon Tanda, Taluka South Solapur, District Solapur. The petitioners wanted that Respondent No.3 should not establish the slaughter-house for which Respondent No.3 had been granted permission. According to the learned counsel for Respondent No.3, Respondent No.3 has already established the slaughter house but it has not become operative so far. During the course of hearing of this matter, various orders were passed and by one order dated 6th October 2005, passed in another writ petition, a committee was constituted by the Court, headed by retired Judge of this Court. The committee has filed its report. The respondents have filed their objections to the report. Since Respondent No.1 has been granted permission and they are running the slaughter-house and the petitioners object it, we feel that it will be proper for the Government to consider the matter, if representation is made by the petitioners against running of the slaughter house by Respondent No.3. If such a representation is made, the Government shall consider all the materials and come to its own conclusion as to whether by establishing the slaughter house by Respondent No.3 any law is violated. The Government may also take into consideration the report submitted to this Court by the committee constituted by it and also the 333 objections filed by the respondents to the said report before passing any order. The Government shall hear the petitioners as well as the respondents and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It is made clear that the report of the committee has not been approved by this court and it will be for the Government to consider the report on its own merits. The PIL is disposed of. [BILAL NAZKI, J] NAZKI, J] [BILAL [BILAL NAZKI, J] [S.S.SHINDE, J] J] J] [S.S.SHINDE, [S.S.SHINDE,

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 18 Jun 2008. The bench was S S SHINDE.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments