Petitioners filed this PIL seeking establishment of a District Consumer Protection Council at Alibag. The court held that the council was duly notified and functional, dismissing the petition as the grievance no longer survived.
No order as to costs.
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 INTERESST LITIGATION NO. 51 OF 2006
Janjagruti Grahak Munch
Raigad & Anr. .. Petitioners.
vs.
State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents.
Mr. A.K. Singh for Petitioners.
Mr. P.M. Patil, AGP., for R. No. 1.
CORAM: J.N. PATEL &
SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ.
DATE: 22ND NOVEMBER, 2007.
P.C.
. This petition was filed in public interest
seeking a relief that this Court should direct the
respondent no. 1 to provide respondent no. 2 entire
staff as per sanctioned strength and adequate
infrastructure necessary for proper functioning of the
Court and for constituting the District Consumer
Protection Council at Alibag, district Raigad and other
ancillary reliefs. The respondent authorities have
duly notified the District Consumer Protection Council
2
at Alibag and a District Forum is also functional.
Therefore, the grievance of the petitioners does not
survive. Therefore, the petition stands dismissed. No
order as to costs.
(J.N. Patel, J.)
(Smt. Nishita Mhatre, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the District Consumer Protection Council at Alibag was functional after notification.
Janjagruti Grahak Mund
State of Maharashtra
J.N. PATEL
NISHITA MHATRE
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