When the plea filed through advocate Altaf Khan was listed earlier, the Court had asked the petitioner to deposit ₹1 lakh as pre-condition which the petitioner agreed to do.
The plea claimed that renaming of ‘Pathanwadi’ Metro Station to ‘Dindoshi’ was in sheer violation of the policy framed by MMRDA.
According to MMRDA’s policy, when there are more than two stations in a revenue village, the nearest Wadi’s name should be considered for one of the stations.
However, in the present case, MMRDA had originally named the station on line 7 as ‘Pathanwadi’.
As per the petitioner, under undue political pressure and pursuant to requests of two MLAs, Atul Bhatkhalkar and Sunil Prabhu, the name of ‘Pathanwadi’ station was changed to ‘Dindoshi’.
The plea pointed out that as per the documents obtained under the RTI Act, MMRDA itself admitted that ‘Dindoshi’ is the name of a nearby revenue village and not of the nearest Wadi.
It was claimed that the renaming of the station was arbitrary and affected the sentiments of residents of ‘Pathanwadi’ and was, therefore, in breach of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Source: Barandbench
