Disposed
Amarsinh Jotyajirao Jadhavrao v. Union of India and Ors.
Bombay HCPIL/35/2004
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN 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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.35 OF 2004
Amarainh J. Jadhavrao. .. Petitioner.
vs.
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents.
None for Petitioner.
Mr. Rajendra Raghuvanshi, Additional Solicitor
General with G. Hariharan & Ms. Rutuja
Ambekar i/by shri H.D. Rathod
for respondent nos. 1 & 2.
Mr. P.M. Patil, AGP., for respondent no. 3.
CORAM: J.N. PATEL &
A.A. SAYED, JJ.
DATE: 22ND OCTOBER, 2007.
P.C.
. Heard the learned Additional Solicitor General
for respondent nos. 1 & 2. Our attention is drawn to
the affidavit of respondent nos. 1 and 2 filed by V.K.
Sharma, Deputy Secretary (Haj) in the Ministry of
External Affairs. The affidavit clearly indicates that
the Government of India has initiated the process to
formulate a comprehensive policy in regard to
2
pilgrimages abroad by citizens of India and as this
involves the complex issue requiring extensive
consultation with different ministries and
organisations and representatives of persons belonging
to different religions and sects it will take some time
for the Government of India to come up with a
comprehensive enactment by way of a policy decision to
benefit all concerned.
2. We accept this commitment made to the court on
behalf of the Ministry of External Affairs and in our
view it is not necessary to issue any writ, order or
direction as the State as well as the Government of
India are conscious of their responsibility relating to
the subject matter of the public interest litigation.
Therefore, the public interest litigation stands
disposed of. No order as to costs.
(J.N. Patel, J. )
(A.A. Sayed, J. )
AMARAINH J. JADHAVRAO
UNION OF INDIA
J.N. PATEL
A.A. SAYED
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