A single line order where the petitioner did not appear in person. The court rejected the PIL on technical grounds regarding lack of material particulars, leaving the merits undecided.
Petition rejected as the petitioner did not present material particulars.
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.
Deshmane
1
11.PIL.101-14.doc
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.101 OF 2014 [Shrikant B. Kulkarni Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.]
Office Notes, Office
Memorandam of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s Orders appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders
None for the Petitioner.
Mr. Abhijeet A. Joshi, for Respondent Nos.1E, 1F and 1G.
Mr. V.S. Gokhale, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1A, 1B, 1C and 1D.
CORAM : A.S. OKA, AND A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ. DATE : 07th JULY, 2014 P.C. :-
(A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.) (A. S. OKA, J.)
1 / 1
Shrikant B. Kulkarni
State of Maharashtra
A. S. Oka
A. S. Chandurkar
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
