Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the construction of a jetty near the Janjira Fort in the Raigad District.

The division bench of the high court, consisting of Chief Justice Devendra K Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor, heard the PIL filed by local politician Mahesh Mohite, who claimed that the fort in question was a protected monument.

The petition contended that the Maritime Board had awarded the tender for the construction of the jetty to DVP Infra Project Private Ltd. This jetty was intended to be built at the entrance of the fort, facing the sea.

The local politician submitted that the fishermen's community had conveyed their concerns to him through a letter regarding the construction, prompting his approach to the court.

Furthermore, the PIL sought directions to be issued to the State Government and Maritime Board for the rehabilitation of affected locals, absorption of fishermen into job opportunities arising from tourism, and allocation of new shops and business opportunities, such as operating ferries.

The bench questioned the advocate representing the politician about why the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) was not impleaded as a party and why the petition had not been filed by the fishermen's society directly.

“Is ASI is party? The petition could have been filed by fishermen. Why should we entertain the petition of a politician? Let the society file a petition. Why can't they file? Where is the resolution of society? You can't file a petition like this. Why is it not filed by Mahalaxmi Machimar society,” the bench said.

The bench went on to express that the court was not a platform for a political field, emphasizing that the politician, who was not a member or office bearer of the fishermen's society, should not be utilizing the legal proceedings for political purposes.

“Does the letter say please file a petition? You take the matter in whatever manner. We are not providing a field to play politics. Why has society not filed a petition? What is this? We don’t appreciate this. You are not an office bearer or member. Why can't society come?” the bench said.

The high court therefore proceeded to dismiss the petition and allowed the fisherman society to seek appropriate remedy under the law.

“The fishermen who are said to be affected have already formed a cooperative society for their welfare. If they were to be affected then it was for society to take up the matter to all forums including authorities and if advised to recourse of action available under law. The petitioner is not even a member of society. Before approaching court, he is not made a single representation including ASI whose regulations are said to be violated, has been made. In the aforesaid circumstance, we decline to entertain the petition. It is dismissed. Notwithstanding the dismissal of the petition it is open for society or any other fisherman are person affected in the vicinity to take up the cause before any forum or court as available” the order reads.  

Case title: Mahesh Harishchandea Mohite vs State of Maharashtra & Ors