The High Court held that a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not a proper remedy for the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to file a civil proceeding.
The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to file a civil proceeding.
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
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 104 OF 2009
Shri Vidyadhar Moreshwar Kulkarni ).. Petitioner
Versus
The Kolhapur Municipal Corporation ) and others ).. Respondents
Mr. S.S. Tambekar for the Petitioner.
CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J. DATED : 26TH NOVEMBER 2009
P.C .
In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of
the considered view that Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not a proper remedy for the Petitioner. The Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to file such
civil proceeding as may be tenable in law.
CHIEF JUSTICE
A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is a proper remedy for the Petitioner in the given facts and circumstances.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shri Vidyadhar Moreshwar Kulkarni
The Kolhapur Municipal Corporation
Swatanter Kumar
A.M. Khanwilkar
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
