State counsel committed to reconsidering the petitioner's representation and informing the court of the order; no substantive legal principles were articulated.
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.191 OF 2007
Shubham Mahila Vikas Mandal. .. Petitioner. Vs. The Tahsildar, Ambernath & Ors. .. Respondents
Shri S.G. Karandikar for the Petitioner. Shri P.M. Patil, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4.
CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & A.P. DESHPANDE, J DATE : 11TH SEPTEMBER, 2008
P.C.
Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that they will consider the representation made by the Petitioner before it, in accordance with the provisions of law and the policy, and will inform the Petitioner of the order so passed accordingly. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the State, the Petition is disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE
A.P. DESHPANDE, J
Shubham Mahila Vikas Mandal
The Tahsildar, Ambernath
Swatanter Kumar
A.P. Deshpande
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
