The Court disposed of a PIL challenging the Maratha reservation order as infructuous since the matter is pending before the Supreme Court after a Division Bench of this Court reduced the reservation percentage.
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.
PIL123-2014.doc
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.123 OF 2014
Vijaykumar s/o Kashinathrao Chikhlikar and another
PETITIONERS
VERSUS
The Principal Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
RESPONDENT
Mr. R.D. Biradar, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. M.M. Nerlikar, A.G.P. for the respondent
CORAM: PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, CJ & R.G. AVACHAT, J. DATE: 23.09.2019
PER COURT :
1] The Government Resolution dated 15th July, 2014, reserving 16% posts for members of the Maratha community, challenged in the
Public Interest Litigation, has been upheld with reduction of the
PIL123-2014.doc
percentage of reservation by a Division Bench of this Court at its Principal Seat in Mumbai.
2] The petition has been rendered infructuous as far as this Court is concerned. The matter is before the Supreme Court currently since the decision of the Division Bench of this Court has been challenged before the Supreme Court and notice in the petition seeking special leave to appeal has been issued.
3] The Public Interest Litigation is disposed of as infructuous. No
costs.
(R.G. AVACHAT, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE
npj/PIL123-2014.doc
Vijaykumar s/o Kashinathrao Chikhlikar
The Principal Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance, Maharashtra State
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
R.G. AVACHAT
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
