The petitioner's P.I.L. was dismissed for want of prosecution as none of the parties were present in court.
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.
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
P.I.L. NO. 6 OF 2012
V.P. Patil
.. Petitioner
Vs
Union of India
.. Respondent
None Present.
CORAM : D. D. SINHA &
SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ
DATE : 22nd AUGUST, 2012.
P.C.:
[ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J ] [ D. D. SINHA, J ]z
jfoanz vkacsjdj
Pg 1 of 1
V.P. Patil
Union of India
D. D. Sinha
V. K. Tahilramani
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
