The Court disposed of a PIL filed by the petitioner without keeping it pending, as the petitioner did not appear despite notice, but clarified that the raised issues are not finally decided.
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.
pil64
1
ssp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.64 OF 2004
Vijaykumar Shikaji Marathe
vs.
State of Maharashtra & Anr.
...Petitioner
...Respondents
None for the petitioner
Mr.V.S.Gokhale, AGP for State
CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
A.K.MENON, JJ.
DATE : MARCH 2, 2015
P.C.:
1As the Advocate for the petitioner is no longer
practising, we had issued Court service notice to
the petitioner. The Court service notice has been
served on the petitioner on 19th January 2015.
However, none appears for the petitioner. We have
perused the affidavit in reply filed by Shri
Ravindra Shirpati Savalkar, the Sub Divisional
Officer, Sawantwadi, District Sindhudurg.
2Considering what is stated in the reply, we are
of the view that the petition need not be kept
pending. Accordingly we dispose of the petition.
We, however, make it clear that the issues raised by
the petitioner are not finally decided. Rule is
discharged. No order as to costs.
(A.K.MENON,J.)
Vijaykumar Shikaji Marathe
State of Maharashtra
A.S. Oka
A.K. Menon
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