Case Title: Indumati Borse v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Decided on October 17, 2023.
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 8979 of 2023.
CORUM: HON’BLE JUSTICE G.S. PATEL & HO’NBLE JUSTICE KAMAL KHATA.
Introduction
In the present petition, the petitioner seeks three reliefs from the Hon’ble High Court. The petitioner prayed that on observing the legality of the statue installed on the triangle on Kothrud Karve Road Pune and order respondent No.1 to remove the statue of Bharat Ratna Maharishi Dhond Karve from the triangular comer portion of the acquired property situated at Survey No. 1 Hissa No 4, CTS No.406 to 434, Kothrud Karve Road, Pune, admeasuring approximately 1500 sq metres and to utilize the triangular comer portion of the acquired property for the purpose of road widening. On observing the facts and circumstances of the present case the Hon’ble High Court dismissed the petitioner’s plea to remove the statute and also said that it is not the petitioner who will dictate how the public purpose should be.
Facts of the case
The petitioner Indumati Borse, age 90, filed the writ petition against the Municipal Corporation (PMC) challenging the installation of a statue of Maharshi Dhond Keshav a Bharat Ratna recipient and former reformer, on the Kothrud Karve Road in Pune. The petitioner has given her land for the road widening and the remaining land to ad agency Keti Ads to put up hoarding for their ads. The petitioner argued that the presence of a statue would affect the hoardings of ads.
Court’s observation
The Hon’ble High Court observed that Maharshi Dhond Keshav was a great reformer. He advocated the rights of widows and opened the first university for women SNDT University in 1916. Also, the young generation has the right to know the great personality of the country who has donated their lives for the sake of the people and the petitioner has given her property to the municipal corporation for the use of public purpose and the public purpose does not mean to make dams and bridges, this is the total discretion of the state to use the land. It is well settled that monuments, memorials, or any other mark or built structure is a sufficiently public purpose. The business of the Government concerns a wide range of utilities. It is not for the petitioner to dictate what the public purpose should be. There is no substance to the challenge to the impugned order of 10th April 2023 either. Indeed, the Petitioner has no locus in that regard. The hoarding license was to Ketki Ads. That entity is not before us. It has filed its own proceedings but obtained no order against the PMC regarding the cancellation of its hoarding license. The Petitioner has no cause of action in that regard and dismissed the plea.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best family law firm, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm. Best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by: Aamir Hussain.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW/READ JUDGEMENT
