The petitioners requested completion of a water scheme. Counsel later confirmed the work was over, dispelling the grievance. The court disposed of the writ petition as infructuous.
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 OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.12 OF 2011
UMESH DEVIDAS KHALADKAR AND ANR VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioners : Shri N.B.Suryawanshi AGP for Respondents: Shri P.P.More Advocate for Respondent 6 : Shri S.S.Rathi
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, JJ. Dated: October 22, 2013
PER COURT :-
( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ) ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. )
akl
Umesh Devidas Khaladkar And Anr
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
Ravindra V. Ghuge
B.P. Dharmadhikari
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
