The single-judge chamber order disposed of an intervention application by allowing it in terms of the prayer clause (a). Given that other similar applications were already allowed, this one was similarly permitted without detailed analysis.
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 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 54 OF 2007 IN
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (W.P.) NO. 435 OF 2005
Janhit Manch & Ors. ...Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents And The All India Liquid & Bulk Importers & Exporters Association ....Applicant/Intervener
Petitioner No.2, in person, present
Mr. G.W. Mattos, Assistant Government Pleader, for the State Mr. A. Rehman i/by M/s. D.H. Law Associates for the Applicant/Intervener
Mr. A.A. Joshi i/by Mr. Nivit Srivastava for the Intervener Ms. Shyama Parkar i/by M/s. M.P. Rege & Co. for the Intervener.
CORAM: F.I. REBELLO AND R.V. MORE, JJ. DATE : JUNE 16, 2010
P.C. :-
Considering the fact that the other intervention applications have been allowed, this intervention application is also allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Chamber Summons is disposed of accordingly.
( F.I. REBELLO, J.)
(R.V. MORE, J.)
Janhit Manch & Ors.
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
F.I. Rebello
R.V. More
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
