The High Court declined to entertain a Public Interest Litigation because the petitioner, a trader in Pune personally affected by the proposed local body tax levy, was not a fit person to file a PIL.
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.
pil-121.13
1
pmw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.121 OF 2013
Maniklal Peerchand Lunawat … Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and others
... Respondents
Mr. V.B. Bhagat, for the Petitioner.
Mr. S.K. Shinde, Government Pleader a/w Mr. A.B. Vagyani, Additional Government Pleader, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ.
DATE : 2nd MAY, 2014
P.C.
instructions of the Petitioner, states that the Petitioner is a trader who is carrying on business in the City of Pune. He also states that the Petitioner's son is a Trader in the City of Pune. The challenge in this Petition is to the action of the State Government by which Pune Municipal Corporation has been directed to levy Local Body Tax on the entry of the goods within the limits of Pune Municipal Corporation with effect from 1st April, 2013.
1 of 2
2 pil-121.13
2 of 2
Maniklal Peerchand Lunawat
The State of Maharashtra
A.S. Oka
A.A. Sayed
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
