In Public Interest Litigation No. 36 of 2006, this Constitution Bench of a High Court court dismissed a petitioner's challenge to a stamp registrar's decision, finding no merit in the petition as the decision complied with requirements and public convenience.
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 B |
OMBAY | |
|---|---|---|---|
| APPELLATE | SIDE | ||
| PUBLIC IN |
TEREST LITIGATION NO. 36 OF |
2006. | |
| SHRI MA | NSINGH V. JAGD | ALE ... PETITIONER. |
|
| VS. | |||
| THE STA | TE OF MAHARA | SHTRA & ORS. ... RESPONDENTS |
. |
| MR. | SURESH | M. SABRAD FOR THE PETI |
TIONER. |
| MR.V.P.M | ALWANKAR | AGP FOR THEK RESPON |
DENTS. |
| ..... | |||
| CORAM : J.N.Patel and A.A.Sayed, |
JJ. |
||
| DATE : September 5, |
2007. | ||
| ..... | |||
| P.C. | |||
| 1. | Non | e for the Petitioner. Learned AGP | |
| appearing | for | the State submits that affidavit |
of |
| Shri | Umesh | Tukaram Mehetre, Joint Director |
Registrar |
| and | Collector | of Stamps, Satara, District Satara |
has |
| been | filed. | We have gone through the affidavit |
and |
| we | are satisf |
ied that the decision taken by |
the |
| Authority | is | in accordance with the requirements |
and |
| keeping | in view |
the public convenience in the |
matter. |
Therefore, we do not find any merit in the petition,
the same stands dismissed.
[J.N.Patel, J.]
Shri Mansingh
The State of Maharashtra
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
