Petitioner filed PIL claiming ill-advised remedy due to subsequent developments. Court dismissed the petition with no reasons recorded.
Petition dismissed.
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.
19.pil.252.09.doc
jdk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PIL NO. 252 OF 2009
Shri. Suresh Tripathi
..Petitioner
Vs.
Union of India and Ors.
..Respondents
Mr. Nitin Deshpande for Petitioner Mr. Suresh Kumar along with T.J.Pandian for Respondents
CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR AND SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J J.
DATE : OCTOBER 04, 2012.
P.C.:
in this petition because of subsequent developments. As a matter of fact, the remedy of PIL is completely ill-advised in the fact situation of the present case. Be that as it may, petition is dismissed.
[ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.] [ A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. ]
kandarkar
Pg 1 of 1
Shri. Suresh Tripathi
Union of India
A.M.KHANWILKAR
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
