Dismissed
Vashu Panjumal Kukreja v. Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Bombay HCPIL/17/2011
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Dond 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.
1 PIL.17-2011
Dond
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.17 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.197 OF 2012 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 57 OF 2014
Vashu Panjumal Kukreja
..Petitioner
Vs.
Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation & Ors.
..Respondents.
Mr. Rahul Singh for Petitioner. Ms. Gauri Godse for Respondent No.1. Dr. Jayashree B. Kurp, 'B' Panel Counsel for Respondent Nos.3 to 5. Mr. Kunal Bhange i/b Sathyam Acharya for Respondent \ Nos.7,8,9 10 and 12.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA AND
A.S. GADKARI, JJ.
DATE : 22 AUGUST 2014.
P.C.:
1 The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, on instruction and as affidavit dated 9.4.2014 is also filed that the Petitioner was the exemployee of Respondent Nos.7 to 10 who are the developers of the property in question and in view of earlier order, is not pressing the present PIL and the issues. The Respondents have no objection for such withdrawal and the disposal.
2 PIL.17-2011
2 The Petition is accordingly disposed of. Interim order, if any, also stands vacated. Civil Applications are also disposed of accordingly. No costs.
(A.S. GADKARI, J.)
(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
2 / 2
Vashu Panjumal Kukreja
Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation
Anoop V. Mohta
A. S. Gadkari
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