The High Court of Bombay Civil Appeals dismissed a public interest litigation petition arising from P.I.L. No. 89 of 2011, holding that a conditional order dated April 29, 2014 had become operative.
Discontinued the petition as the operative conditional order dated April 29, 2014 rendered further directions redundant.
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
27.PIl.89-11.doc
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.89 OF 2011
[Mr. Edwin Britto Vs. The Secretary, Union of India & Ors.]
Office Notes, Office Memorandam of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders
Court’s or Judge’s Orders
Ms. Prity Bhavsar i/b. Rakesh Agrawal, for the Petitioner.
CORAM : A.S. OKA, AND A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ. DATE : 14th JULY, 2014
P.C. :-
(A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.) (A. S. OKA, J.)
1 / 1
Ms. Prity Bhavsar
The Secretary, Union of India & Ors.
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
