The Bench rejected a Public Interest Litigation regarding employment, holding that PIL is not entertainable when filed by a third person with no personal interest, relying on Supreme Court precedent.
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.
pil93.14.doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 93 OF 2014
Manik s/o Trimbak Wakde .. PETITIONER
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS
Mr. T. M. Venjane, advocate for petitioner. Mr. K. G. Patil, AGP for the State.
=====
CORAM : R.M. BORDE & V. L. ACHLIYA, JJ. DATE : 1st AUGUST, 2014.
PER COURT :
Interest Litigation is devoid of substance hence stands rejected.
( V. L. ACHLIYA ) ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a Public Interest Litigation regarding employment at the instance of a third person having no personal interest is entertainable.
Whether Public Interest Litigation is devoid of substance in the given circumstances.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hari Bansh Lal Vs. Sahodar Prasad Mahto and othersApplied¶12
(2010) 9 SCC 655 · Who else cites this
Manik s/o Trimbak Wakde
The State of Maharashtra
R.M. Borde
V. L. Achliya
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
