The Bombay High Court in Public Interest Litigation Nos. 10 and 11 of 2011 allowed the Petitioners to withdraw the filings with liberty to institute appropriate proceedings before the relevant authority including BEST.
Both PILs allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to approach the appropriate authority including BEST.
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.
1/1
PIL/10/2011 WITH PIL/11/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATON NO.10 OF 2011 WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.11 OF 2011
Vinod Ghosalkar and Anr.
…. Petitioners.
V/s
The State of Maharashtra and Others ….. Respondents.
Mr. Chandan Tanna i/b Ricabchand for the Petitioner. Ms. P.H. Kantharia, Government Pleader for Respondent No.1/State.
Mr. Rishabh Agarwal i/b Trilegal for Respondent No.3.
CORAM: V. M. KANADE & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.
DATE: 29th January, 2016
P.C.:-
The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners seeks leave to withdraw both these PILs viz. PIL No.10 of 2011 and PIL No.11 of 2011 with liberty to take out appropriate proceedings before the appropriate authority including BEST. Both these PILs are allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed.
(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)
bdpps
Vinod Ghosalkar and Anr.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
V. M. Kanade
Revati Mohite Dere
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
