The court disposed of a praecipe filed by the respondent/corporate to correct a clerical error in a prior order, clarifying a date of notification from 1925 instead of 2005.
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.
501-PIL.109.2008
jvs
SALUNKE J V
Digitally signed by SALUNKE J V Date: 2023.03.03 10:56:39 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 109 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.76 OF 2009 IN
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 109 OF 2008
Santosh Babanrao Walke
….. Petitioner
Vs.
Videsh Sanchar Nigam & Ors. ….. Respondents
WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11346 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11339 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11340 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11347 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11348 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6647 OF 2017 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.9163 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.602 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.614 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4341 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4744 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.434 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4342 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.132 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4333 OF 2016
1
501-PIL.109.2008
WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4332 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11464 OF 2015 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4747 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4863 OF 2016
Mr. Sandeep Patade i/b. Mr. Kayval Shah for the petitioner/applicant.
Mr. Anil Wani with Ms. Supriya S. Devergudi i/b. ANS Law Associates for respondent no. 1.
Ms. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP for State.
CORAM: S. V. GANGAPURWALA, Act.CJ.& SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATE: MARCH 2, 2023
P.C.:
1. The praecipe is moved by the respondent no. 1 for speaking to minutes in respect of the order dated 20th February 2023. It is submitted that in para no. 1, the date of notification is typed as “10th August 2005”. In fact, the same ought to be “10th August 1925”.
2. The learned advocate for the petitioner is present and accepts the said position.
3. In light of that, in para 1 of the order dated 20th February 2023, instead of the date “10th August 2005”, the same shall be read as “10th August 1925”.
4. The praecipe is disposed of.
(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
2
Santosh Babanrao Walke
Videsh Sanchar Nigam & Ors.
S.V. Gangapurwala
Sandeeep V. Marne
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
