Single-line order disposing of PIL 102/2015 as cause of action does not survive based on reply filed by Respondent State supported by compliance affidavit.
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.
PIL.102/2015(42)
1
mnm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 102 OF 2015
Dayanand Kallappa Sonage ...Petitioner Vs. The District Collector, Solapur & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Mahadeo A. Chaudhari, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. S.S. Kanetkar, Advocate for Respondent No.11 Mr. Asif Patel, AGP for Respondent Nos. 6 to 10 and 12 & 13
CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR &
M.S. KARNIK, JJ. DATED : 20TH JUNE, 2016
P.C. :
In view of the reply dated 1st July, 2015 filed by the
Respondent State supported by Compliance Affidavit Counsel
for the Petitioner submits that the cause of action does not survive. In view of the said statement this Petition is disposed of accordingly.
(M.S. KARNIK, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)
Dayanand Kallappa Sonage
District Collector, Solapur
Shantanu S. Kemkar
M.S. Karnik
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
