The Public Interest Litigation was dismissed because there was no declaration in terms of sub-rule (3-A) of Rule 1 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. The matter is left open for the petitioner to file a fresh petition.
Public Interest Litigation dismissed; petitioner allowed to file fresh petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 21
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 953 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ramesh Chandra Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Manohar Prasad Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Learned Standing Counsel Sri A.P. Paul has appeared for the State.
There is no declaration in terms of sub-rule (3-A) of Rule 1 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. Hence the Public Interest Litigation is dismissed, leaving it open for the petitioner to file a fresh petition.
Order Date :- 3.5.2019 Jitendra
Ramesh Chandra Yadav
State Of U.P.
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
