The Bombay High Court disposed of Public Interest Litigation No. 119 of 2012, held that it had served its purpose, and directed petitioners to file a private complaint in criminal court if further action was needed regarding respondent no. 1.
The Public Interest Litigation was disposed of.
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.
912-PIL.119.2012.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 119 OF 2012
Dr.Kirit Somaiya and Anr. } Petitioner versus Chhagan Bhujbal and Ors. } Respondents
M/s.Dhruve Liladhar and Co. for the petitioner-absent.
Mr.Sajal Yadav for respondent no.1.
Ms.G.R.Shastri-Additional Government Pleader for State.
Mr.J.G.Aradwad (Reddy) for respondent no.24.
Mr.Roop Basu I/b. M/s.The Law Point for respondent no. 29.
Mr.Advait M. Sethna with Mr.D.P.Singh for the Union of India.
CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & R. I. CHAGLA, JJ.
DATED :- NOVEMBER 14, 2019
P.C. :-
of appropriate legal action against respondent no. 1, who was, at one time, a Minister of the Department of Public Works in the Government of Maharashtra.
Page 1 of 2
J.V.SALUNKE,PS
912-PIL.119.2012.doc
(R.I.CHAGLA, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Page 2 of 2
J.V.SALUNKE,PS
Dr. Kirit Somaiya and Anr.
Chhagan Bhujbal and Ors.
S.C. Dharmadhikari
R.I. Chagla
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
