Disposed
Milind Arvind Pandey v. the State of Mah and Ors.
Bombay HCPIL/136/2013
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
pil136.13
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 136 OF 2013 WITH CA/885/2014 IN PIL/136/2013 WITH CA/3863/2014 IN PIL/136/2013
MILIND ARVIND PANDEY
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Thombre S. S.
AGP for Respondents 1 to 8, 10 and 10-A: Mr. K. M. Suryawanshi Advocate for Respondent No.9 : Shri R.N. Dhorde, senior counsel i/b Mr.
Yuvraj Kakade
Advocate for respondent No.12: Mr. K.B. Autade
CORAM : R. M. BORDE AND V. K. JADHAV, JJ.
DATED : 29th SEPTEMBER, 2014
P.C. :-
1. The petitioner has presented an affidavit on 9.9.2014. Para 2 of said affidavit is quoted below:-
“2. I say and submit that, this Hon'ble Court was pleased to direct the police authority to file reply in respect of the same. Accordingly, measurement was carried out by the police department on 2.4.2014. Also the T.I.L.R. Gangapur has specifically on 21.4.2014 communicated that there is no encroachment on land acquired for police quarter Gangapur. The said letter is also annexed to the reply by the respondent No.6. I am satisfied with the said letter and reply filed by the respondent No.6.”
pil136.13 -2-
( V. K. JADHAV, J.) ( R. M. BORDE, J. )
rlj/
Milind Arvind Pandey
The State of Maharashtra and Ors
R. M. Borde
V. K. Jadhav
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