The High Court disposed of the writ petition reserving liberty to approach the Supreme Court regarding violations of the Lalita Kumari judgment. The chamber summons was disposed of, noting the grievance must be tested separately on merits.
Liberty to approach the Supreme Court reserved; advisory only on chamber summons merits.
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
skc
15-PILL-71-16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (L) NO. 71 OF 2016
| Yeshwanth Shenoy | .. | Petitioner |
|---|---|---|
| versus | ||
| The Union of India & Ors. | .. | Respondents |
WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS (L) NO. 242 OF 2016 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (L) NO. 71 OF 2016
| Mr. Advait Sethna & Anr. | .. | Applicants |
|---|---|---|
| In the matter between : |
||
| Yeshwanth Shenoy | .. | Petitioner |
| versus | ||
| The Union of India & Ors. | .. | Respondents |
Mr. Yeshwanth Shenoy - Petitioner in person. Ms P. Kantharia - GP for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Mr. A. Sethna – Applicant present in person in CHS(L) 242 of 2016.
CORAM: DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, C. J. AND M. S. SONAK, J. DATE : 16 SEPTEMBER 2016
P.C.:
1] The writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner
to approach the Apex Court seeking action against the violators of the law declared by the Apex Court in Lalita Kumari vs. Government of U.P.
1 of 2
skc 2 15-PILL-71-16
2] So far as chamber summons is concerned, we are of the opinion that it is altogether a different issue involved in the matter and the grievance indicated in the chamber summons has to be tested and decided on merits separately.
3] With these observations, writ petition and chamber summons
are disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE
(M. S. SONAK, J.)
chandka
2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can approach the Supreme Court regarding violation of law declared in Lalita Kumari.
Whether the chamber summons can be decided on merits separately.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lalita Kumari vs. Government of U.P.Explained¶14
Lalita Kumari vs. Government of U.P.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Yeshwanth Shenoy
The Union of India
DR. MANJULA CHELLUR
M. S. SONAK
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
