High Court of Bombay rejected a PIL seeking writ of mandamus, applying the Apex Court precedents holding that approaching concerned authorities is mandatory before approaching this court.
Potition dismissed; liberty granted to make appropriate application before the appropriate authority.
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-27.15
1
pmw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.27 OF 2015
Association for aiding Justice … Petitioners Versus Union of India and Ors. … Respondents
Mr. Dinesh Siroya for the Petitioners. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the Respondent No.2.
CORAM : A.S. OKA & C.V. BHADANG, JJ. DATE : 8th JANUARY, 2016
P.C.
. By this PIL, a writ of mandamus has been sought by the Petitioners. Before seeking a writ of mandamus, the Petitioners have not approached the concerned authorities for seeking justice. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. and others v/s. Union of India1 and in particular in paragraphs 24 and 25 thereof, this Petition cannot be entertained. Accordingly, we dispose of the Petition by granting liberty to make appropriate application before the appropriate authority.
1 (1974) 2 SCC 630
1 of 1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus can be entertained without first approaching the concerned authorities.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. and others v/s. Union of IndiaApplied¶10
Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. and others v/s. Union of India (1974) 2 SCC 630 · Who else cites this
Association for aiding Justice
Union of India
A.S. Oka
C.V. Bhadang
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
