The High Court noted that errors alleged by the petitioner regarding medicine purchase policy no longer exist. The court disposed of the PIL noting violations can be looked into separately.
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.
Order
1701pil47.16
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 47/2016.
Shrikant Gajanrao Aaglave. - VERSUS-
State of Maharashtra and others.
Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders.
CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 17, 2018.
Heard Shri N.D. Khamborkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. T. Khan, learned A.G.P. for respondents.
JUDGE JUDGE
Rgd.
Shrikant Gajanrao Aaglave
State of Maharashtra and others
B.P. Dharmadikari
Mrs. Swapna Joshi
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
