SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Bom) 489

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ., Arif S. Doctor, J.
Shaikh Masud Ismail Shaikh & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The Union of India , Through Its Secretary , Home Affairs Department & Ors. - Respondents
Public interest Litigation No. 145 of 2023; with Public interest Litigation No. 148 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 11968 of 2023; with Writ Petition No.12352 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 12358 of 2023; Public interest Litigation No. 93 of 2022 with interim Application No. 1276 of 2023; with interim Application No. 2672 of 2023 in Public interest Litigation No. 93 of 2022; with interim Application No. 17531 of 2022 in Public interest Litigation No. 93 of 2022; with Writ Petition No. 3616 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 3607 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 3294 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 3892 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 3881 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 3886 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 7011 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 6996 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 6997 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 6992 of 2023; with Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 14807 of 2023; with Writ Petition No. 6990 of 2023; with Public interest Litigation No. 173 of 2022; with Public interest Litigation No. 110 of 2022; with Writ Petition No. 1185 of 2023 with interim Application No. 17622 of 2023 with interim Application Stamp No. 14913 of 2023
Decided On : 08-05-2024

Advocates appeared:
Shri Y. H. Muchhala, Senior Advocate a/w Shri Sagheer A. Khan, Shri G. D. Shaikh a/w Shri Abdul Hamid Ansari i/by Judicare Law Associates for Petitioner in PIL/93/2022 with IA/1276/2023. Shri S.B. Talekar a/w Ms. Madhavi Ayyappan i/b Talekar and Associates for Petitioner in PIL/173/2023. Shri Anil Anturkar, Senior Advocate a/w Shri S. S. Kazi for the Petitioner in WP/1185/2023. Shri M. M. Chaudhari i/b. Shri Saeed S. Shaikh for Petitioner in WP/6996/2023, WP/6992/2023, WP/3607/ 2023, WP/3616 /2023, WP/3892/2023, WP/7011/2023, WP/6990/2023, WP/ 3881/2023, WP/6997/2023, WPST/14807/2023 & WP/3886/2023. Shri Hassan Khan a/w Shri Ashwin Sawlani for the Petitioner in WP/3294/2023. Shri Karim Pathan i/b. Shri Shoyab Shaikh a/w Shri Shane Pillai for Petitioner in PIL 110/2022. Shri Devang Vyas, Addl. Solicitor General a/w Mrs. Savita Ganoo & Shri D. P. Singh for the Respondent No. 1- UOI. Dr. Birendra B. Saraf, AG a/w Shri P.P. Kakade, Govt. Pleader, Shri O. A. Chandurkar, Addl. Govt. Pleader a/w Shri Vaibhav Charulwar, ‘B’ Panel Counsel a/w Ms. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP for the State. Shri Pradeep Thorat a/w Ms. Aditi S. Naikare for Respondent No. 4 in PIL/93/2022 (Aurangabad Municipal Corporation).

The court upheld renaming cities under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, affirming that such actions were procedurally valid and not justiciable based on subjective historical claims.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - Notifications changing names of Aurangabad to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Osmanabad to Dharashiv challenged by public interest litigation - Earlier attempts for renaming faced legal challenges, but the current decisions followed approved procedures, reflecting the State's authority to name revenue areas. (Paras 2, 86)

(B) The validity of renaming was questioned based on historical, cultural, and emotional grounds - The court determined the challenge was not justiciable due to the lack of judicial standards available to address such subjective issues. (Paras 12, 61)

(C) The petitions were dismissed citing adherence to statutory requirements without any procedural flaws. (Paras 85, 86)

Facts of the case:
The appellants challenged State Notifications concerning the renaming of cities and revenue areas based on historical claims and procedural irregularities.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the renaming due to compliance with legal requirements under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code and determined that the procedural actions undertaken met statutory obligations.

Issues: Were the renaming Notifications legally sustainable? Was the State's power to rename justified?

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the distinction between cities and revenue areas within relevant legislation, asserting that the lack of a explicit framework for city renaming did not impede the legality of the Notifications.

Result: Petitions dismissed without costs.

Table of Content
1. context of name change in legal proceedings (Para 1 , 2)
2. background and historical attempts to change names (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. arguments against the name change based on rights and identification (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31)
4. court's examination of statutory provisions concerning name change (Para 32 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74)
5. conclusion on legality of notifications concerning name change (Para 76 , 77 , 78)
6. final judicial decision on the case (Para 84 , 85)
7. dismissal of petitions without merit (Para 86 , 87 , 88)

JUDGMENT

Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ. -

(A) PRELUDE :

1. The following quote from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet resonated throughout the hearing of this batch of writ petitions:

    'What's in a name? That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet.'

    In these lines Juliet makes a profound observation about the nature of names and says that a name does not make something that it is; even if rose had a different name other than 'rose', the essence of the flower would not change, it would still be the same. However, the Petitioners disagree with what Shakespeare says through Juliet in his famous tragedy.

(B) CHALLENGE:

2. By instituting these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, some of which are Public Interest Litigation Petitions, the Petitioners assail the validity of Notifications issued by the Government of Maharashtra changing the name of Aurangabad and Osmanabad cities to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Dharashiv, respectively. Challenge in these petitions has also been made to the Notifications issued by the State Government changing the names of revenue areas or units i.e. revenue Division, District, Sub Division, Taluka and Village from Aurangabad revenue areas to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar revenue areas and from Osmanabad revenue areas to Dharashiv revenue areas. The impugned Notification bearing No. Ganab-2715/Mantri 18/C.R.218/29 dated 24th February 2023, whereby the name of Aurangabad city has been changed to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar city, is extracted hereinbelow:

    'GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT

    Hutatma Rajguru Chowk, Madam Cama Marg, Mantralaya,

    Mumbai 400 032, dated the 24th February 2023.

    NOTIFICATION

    No. Ganab-2715/Mantri 18/C.R.218/29.-The Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India vide its letter No.11/19/2022-M&G, dated 24th February, 2023, has approved the proposal of the Government of Maharashtra, for changing the name of City 'Aurangabad' to 'Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar'. The Government of Maharashtra is hereby pleased to direct that the name of the City 'Aurangabad', Taluka & District-Aurangabad, Maharashtra State shall be changed as 'Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar" (Nr itux), Taluka & District-Aurangabad, Maharashtra State.

    2. The necessary changes shall be carried out in the Government records of the State by all concerned as shown in the following TABLE :

    TABLE

    By order and in the name of the Governor of Maharashtra,

    PRAKASH INDALKAR,

    Deputy Secretary to Government of Maharashtra.'

    The Notification bearing No.Ganab-4721/CR-73/A-29 dated 24th February 2023 changing the name of Osmanabad city to Dharashiv city is also extracted hereinbelow:

    'GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT

    Hutatma Rajguru Chowk, Madam Cama Marg,

    Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032, dated the 24th February 2023.

    NOTIFICATION

    No. Ganab-4721/CR-73/A/29.-The Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India vide its letter No.11/18/2022-M&G, dated 7th February, 2023, has approved the proposal of the Government of Maharashtra, for changing the name of City 'Osmanabad' to 'Dharashiv'. The Government of Maharashtra is hereby pleased to direct that the name of the City 'Osmanabad', Taluka & District Osmanabad, Maharashtra State shall be changed as 'Dharashiv' (mifr), Taluka & District Osmanabad, Maharashtra State.

    2

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top