Single-judge bench rejected a PIL entitled to pleadings, holding it failed to disclose an actionable cause of action due to omission of development plan details and notification date.
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.
1/2
12-pil-90-19.doc
pdp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 90 OF 2019
Mr. Shrimant S. Bansode .. Petitioner Vs.
The Commissioner
Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation & Ors.
.. Respondents
Mr. Prashant Pandey a/w Mr. Aiqan Menon I/by Mr. Jitendra Sonawane for Petitioner.
CORAM: PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, CJ. & SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
SEPTEMBER 19, 2019.
P.C.
2/2
12-pil-90-19.doc
has been annexed. The starting point of the journey had to be said pleading.
SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. CHIEF JUSTICE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the PIL discloses an actionable cause of action given the absence of the date of notification and annexation of the development plan.
Mr. Shrimant S. Bansode
The Commissioner, Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation
Pradeep Nandrajog
Bharati Dangre
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
