Criminal Writ Petition challenging the denial of permission for a function. The court held that the cause of action had ceased to exist and disposed of the petition with liberty to challenge similar future orders.
Petition disposed of with liberty to challenge similar orders passed in the future.
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
5 wp.97.10
ndm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 97 OF 2010
Vidya Bhushan Manik. ... Petitioner Vs.
the Union of India and ors. ... Respondents
Mr. V.R. Gautam i/b Mr. Akhilesh Singh for the Petitioner. Mr. D.A.Nalawade with Ms. Rebecca Gonsalves for Respondent No.1. Mr. K.V. Saste, APP for the State.
CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR and U.D. SALVI, JJ. DATE : 30th August, 2010.
P.C.
1 This petition is challenging the order passed by Respondent No.1 dated 31st December, 2009 whereby the Petitioner was denied permission to hold function called Mahalanth Sammellan on 07th March, 2009 at the specified place. Since the cause of action does not survive, we dispose of this petition with liberty to the Petitioner to challenge the similar order, if passed against the Petitioner in future by the authority on the grounds urged in the present petition. All questions are kept open.
2 Petition disposed of accordingly.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow the petitioner's challenge to the refusal of permission for a function.
Vidya Bhushan Manik
the Union of India
A.M. Khanwilkar
U.D. Salvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
