Mumbai: Why Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog Disposing PIL By Foul Play ?

हमेशा जनता को चूना क्यों लगाया जाता है?

Mumbai: The Chief Justice Of Bombay high court has disposed the public interest litigation unconstitutionally by hitting state revenue . The disposal will profit only corporate companies not any common men.
Sapan Shrivastava a media reporter filed PIL against illegal mobile towers at Bombay High Court. There are more than 2.25 Lac mobile towers across Maharashtra. As per DOT guidelines of 2013 all the mobile towers has to comply various NOC's including structure Stability . When the matter reached on board then petitioner draw the attention of court that a writ petition is pending at High court by tower companies since 2014. There is stay since 2014 for not taking coercive action. Petitioner requested court to club PIL with this writ petition but CJ Pradeep Nandrajoy dismissed the petition. In order he did not mentioned that the petitioner informed the court that matter is pending as writ petition and there is stay since 2014. Inspite to club this writ petition with PIL he dismissed the PIL with order that court cannot take action against illegal mobile towers due to stay order and matter will be decided in WP only. In past Bombay high court clubbed many PILs and WP of same topic. It is in practise that matter of same nature should be clubbed and they are heard jointly. The Supreme court also use this practise as per rule. But the Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog dismissed the PIL by foul play and in private interest. There is penalty of Rs 40 Lac approx per mobile tower as per MRTP act. Due to this foul play the state lost revenue of Rs 40000 K approx . This huge money can be use for welfare schemes and wavier of farmers loan. The penalty will also be more than BMC budget . The illegal mobile towers are also risk to life of citizens. Many times these towers falls and people lost life. The CJ of Bombay High Court  is acting against rule of law and hurting national interest by violating supreme court rulings. He has disposed many matters in single hit . The CJ and Justice Nitin Jamdar did not believe in affidavit in reply and hurry to dispose PILs. Public must know that the CJ Pradeep Nandrajog was advocate of commercial clients and Justice Nitin Jamdar has also represented Banks, MCGM etc during practise period. They may have not disclosed their links with private companies.