The High Court admitted a PIL filed by the petitioner concerning civic amenities but dismissed it as withdrawn. The court clarified that the liberty granted does not allow challenging the transfer of government employees.
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.
Digitally signed by MULEY MULEY SHUBHAM SHUBHAM PRAVINRAO PRAVINRAO Date: 2023.08.23 20:14:47 +0530
1 7-PIL-133-2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 133 OF 2023
Sunil Jabarchand Modi … Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents
Mr. Avinash M. Gokhale a/w Amrin Khan for Petitioner. Mr. P. P. Kakade, GP a/w R. A. Salunkhe, AGP for State. Mr. Abhijit M. Adagule for Respondent Nos.2 & 3. Mr. Siddharth A. Mehta for Respondent No.4.
CORAM : DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. & ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATE : 23rd AUGUST, 2023
P.C. :
1/2
Shubham
2 7-PIL-133-2023.doc
so far as the grievances relating to civic amenities are concerned.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)
(CHIEF JUSTICE)
2/2
Shubham
Sunil Jabarchand Modi
State of Maharashtra
Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya
Arif S. Doctor
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
