A Public Interest Litigation filed in February 2001 was dismissed because the petitioners failed to pay bhatta charges and there was a lapse of over four years after notice was directed to be issued in 2003.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
P.I.L. NO. 43 OF 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of :
coram, appearances, Court’s Orders: Court’s or Judge’s orders
or directions and Registrar Orders:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.A.M. Joshi for the Petitioners.
CORAM : H.L. GOKHALE, ACG. CJ. &
V.M. KANADE, J.
DATE : 8TH FEBRUARY 2007
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr.Joshi in support of this
petition.
2. This petition was filed on 12th
February 2001. By an order passed on
30th September 2003, a Division Bench
directed issue of notice to the
Respondents. The Petitioners have not
cared to pay the bhatta charges all
these years. This is the kind of
interest the Petitioners have in the
matter which is filed as a P.I.L. More
than 4 years have gone after the court
directed issue of notice. Petition is
dismissed for non-prosecution.
ACG. CHIEF JUSTICE
V.M. KANADE, J.
Petitioners
Respondents
H.L. Gokhale
V.M. Kanade
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