Three writ petitions were filed. The petitioner expressing no desire to press them were disposed of as not pressed. No substantive legal issues were addressed.
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.39 OF 2006
Maniklal Pirchand Lunawat & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs .. .. Mr. Gajanan Heramb Deo & Ors. Respondents
WITH
PIL WRIT PETITION NO.37 OF 2006
Maniklal Peerchand Lunawat. .. Petitioner Vs.
Shri Mohanlal Pannalal Lunkad & Ors. .. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4802 OF 2008
Mr. Maniklal Pirchand Lunawat & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs.
The administrator & Ors. .. Respondents
Shri M.P. Lunawat, Petitioner-in-person. Shri S.R. Nargolkar, AGP for the State.
CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J DATED : 5TH FEBRUARY, 2009.
2
P.C.
The Petitioner, who appears in person, states that he
does not wish to press the writ petitions. The petitions disposed of as
not pressed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J
Maniklal Pirchand Lunawat & Anr.
Mr. Gajanan Heramb Deo & Ors.
Maniklal Peerchand Lunawat
Shri Mohanlal Pannalal Lunkad & Ors.
Mr. Maniklal Pirchand Lunawat & Anr.
The administrator & Ors.
Swatantar Kumar
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
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
