Dismissed
Siddheshwar Mogalappa Kamurthi v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Bombay HCPIL/162/2006
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYIN THE…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
1
MSS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 162 OF 2006
SIDDHESHWAR M. KAMURTHI .. PETITIONERS
Vs.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS... RESPONDENTS
Mr. Ramdas P. Sabban for petitioner
Mr. Nitin Deshpande, AGP for Respondent No. 1.
Mr. R. S. Apte for Respondent No. 2
CORAM:SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. &
SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.
DATE:JULY 05, 2007.
P.C.
. In view of the reply affidavit filed on behalf
of the Urban Development Department, the averments
made in the petition appear to be incorrect.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the
Corporation states that the fund of the Corporation
is not available to the discretion of the Mayor per
se. All expenditures are done in regular course of
the business and accounts are placed before the
house of the Corporation at the proper stage.
2
3. In view of this, we see no reason to keep this
petition pending. It is disposed of, leaving the
parties to bear their costs.
CHIEF JUSTICE
SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.
SIDDHESHWAR M. KAMURTHI
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
SWATANTER KUMAR
RANJANA DESAI
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court