Advertisement
The division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit noted, ”There is not a single word from any person who claims to have cows or is engaged in animal husbandry that because of this theme park he is deprived of grazing his animals or any other villagers are deprived of grazing animals in the said gomala land.”
The PIL also alleged that the work was of poor quality. But the court noted that the petitioners had approached the court very late. After studying the photographs attached with the PIL, the court noted the work must have commenced a few years ago and seemed to be nearing completion.
Dismissing the contention, the HC observed, ”When construction is at completion stage, the petitioners have suddenly woken up and approached this court.” The HC dismissed the petition with the observation that ”(the petition) is nothing but a bundle of assumptions and presumptions of the petitioners and their own impressions.”
Related Articles
Advertisement
”The petitioner is not saying in clear terms that he has objection to the theme park as it is causing some prejudice to the villagers whom the petitioners are representing. But the grievance reflected in the memo of the petition is of poor quality of work.”