High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, dismissed a PIL titled '103 of 2013' where the petitioner failed to give instructions or prosecute the petition, resulting in the petition being disposed of with no order as to costs.
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 Pil103.13.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.103 OF 2013
[Shreepal s/o Ramprasad Pal .vs. State of Maharashtra and others]
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.M. BADAR, JJ.
DATED : MARCH 27, 2015.
We accept the no instruction pursis filed by the counsel for the petitioner on record.
By this petition i.e. registered as Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner has sought a direction to the respondents to increase the electricity supply to Dharni and Chikhaldara Talukas of Amravati District.
Shri Raulkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, states that since the petitioner was not responding and did not give any instructions to the counsel, the learned counsel for the petitioner issued a notice to the petitioner in regard to the withdrawal of the Vakalatnama of the counsel. It is stated that despite the fact that the notice was received by the petitioner, the petitioner has not taken any cognizance of the same.
We find, on a perusal of the order-sheet in the public interest litigation, that no effective order is passed therein and the petitioner has also not prosecuted the petition diligently as on most of the dates of hearing, an adjournment was sought on behalf of the petitioner in view of lack of instructions.
In view of aforesaid, the PIL is disposed of with no order as to costs.
JUDGE
JUDGE
Gulande
Shreepal s/o Ramprasad Pal
State of Maharashtra
Others
Vasanti A. Naik
A.M. Badar
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
