The Bombay High Court on Friday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the authorities to prevent the commercial exploitation of the Late Pramod Mahajan Sports Complex for musical events, including one featuring singer Falguni Pathak, slated to be held from September 26 to October 5..A Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Madhav Jamdar took note of the fact that the playground had been allotted to one Sai Ganesh Welfare Association for Navratri festivities, after procedures mentioned under Section 37A of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act were followed.This Section permits the State to allot playgrounds for functions like Independence Day etc, or religious functions notwithstanding any other law or order in force.The Court noted that the petitioner had failed to show how this provision was not complied with, or how any action contrary to the statute was taken, warranting court intervention. It noted that the function for which the land was being allotted was a religious function and a festival 'dear to the people of this region'. “They are saying that they have granted permissions as per statute. It may appear unconstitutional, but the onus is on you to challenge the unconstitutionality and vires. In the absence to challenge, we cannot intervene. Power or competence to enact such a law falls foul of Article 14 of the Constitution. In our considered opinion, the PIL smacks of lack of bonafides and does not deserve consideration. Be that as it may, it may seem harsh at this stage to interdict at such belated stage,” the Bench concluded while dismissing the plea..The plea filed by activist Vinayak Sanap through Advocate Mayur Faria stated that the ground was earmarked as a playground in the Development Plan of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC).Sanap said that the sports complex ground should always remain open for the public at large, and should not be exploited commercially by any third party.The Court took exception to the fact that Sai Ganesh Welfare Association was not made a party, observing that grave prejudice would be caused to them if they are not heard before any order is passed.Senior Advocate MP Vashi, appearing for the Association, pointed out that the arrangements for the function have been made and that the petitioner had not raised any specific grievance against other similarly organised functions across the city of Mumbai..During the hearing, the Court was informed that the petitioner had approached the High Court in 2018. The PIL was disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh plea with appropriate details.“Chief Justice Nandrajog was right, your pleadings were incomplete, you have again come with an incomplete petition”, the Court observed.The fact that the petitioner did not approach the High Court the following year in 2019 also did not go unnoticed.“So now you wake up from your slumber and come. Why did you not come in 2019? You cannot choose your time for coming to court. You got a cause of action, you came with a half-baked petition, and then you were given liberty. You again had a cause of action and then you did not come. As a petitioner, you also did not do complete research while filing the petition,” the Bench remarked.The Court at this point asked why the petitioners had not challenged vires of Section 37A.“You should challenge this provision, we will strike it down. What is this? What are we doing? And this has been on the statute book for the last 25 years. The effect of this would be that 10 days after this court passes an order, this playground cannot be used for any other activity”, CJ Datta said.