MUMBAI: Saying it would be "harsh'' if it barred the event at such a belated stage, Bombay high court on Friday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) which sought directions to restrain organisers of the forthcoming ‘Navratri Utsav with Falguni Pathak, 2022’ from using the Late Pramod Mahajan Sports Complex in Kandivali (West).
The PIL alleged there was “commercial exploitation” of the ground for events, including the one by singer Falguni Pathak to be held from September 26 to October 5.
The HC bench of chief justice Dipankar Datta and justice Madhav Jamdar questioned the bona fides of the PIL and said, “We take judicial notice of the fact that similar such events are organised during Navratri and the petitioner seems to have targeted only the present event. In our considered opinion, PIL smacks of lack of bonafide and therefore does not deserve consideration,”
Vinayak Yasvant Sanap, filed the PIL saying he is a social activist. The PIL filed through advocate Mayur Faria, said in the Development Plan by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), the venue is earmarked as ‘playground’.
The PIL said it learnt of the Navratri event from booking platforms and tickets are priced from Rs 800 to Rs 4,200. The petitioner said that Supreme Court and high court guidelines were not followed by state authorities while granting permission.
Additional Government Pleader Abhay Patki, for the Maharashtra government contended that permissions were granted under Section 37A of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning (MRTP) Act –which permits temporary change of user for religious functions--to which there was no challenge nor has the PIL challenged the constitutional validity of the section.
For the event organiser, senior counsel Mukesh Vashi added that the PIL has not made Sai Ganesh Welfare Association, Borivali to which the permission was granted, a party respondent. He said the PIL was filed belatedly.
Faria said section 37A was not applicable to the case and sole intention of the petitioner is to ensure that a ‘playground’ for the public is not blocked for 10 days.
The HC said, “Since there was no material to suggest the contrary to the invocation of Section 37A, we have to proceed. Section 37A is a valid piece of legislation which was invoked for grant of permission,” the bench observed.
The HC also noted that since Sai Ganesh was not made party, “Non-joinder of parties is also a reason that petition fails. The petitioner has approached court belatedly. It would be harsh if we would interdict the event at such a delayed stage. For the said reasons, we find no merit in the petition and the same stands dismissed.’’
