Acting Chief Justice held that disputed questions of fact preclude determination of the writ petition as a Public Interest Litigation, disposing of the matter with liberty to approach the Court later.
Liberty given to petitioner to approach the Court with appropriate application in future.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18994 of 2015
=========================================================== 1. Ajay Kumar Rajak son of Kamehswar Rajak, Resident of village- Jawaharpur. P.O.- Chorbey Ambara, P.S- Sarainya, District- Muzaffarpur.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Respondent/s
=========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. GP13- NASIM YAHYA
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH JUDGMENT AND ORDER
ORAL (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ) Date: 04-07-2016
Heard Mr. Kalyan Shankar, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, and Mr. Nasim Yahya, learned Government Pleader No.13, appearing on behalf of the Staterespondents.
Having regard to the fact that the present writ petition, made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the form of a Public Interest Litigation, raises several disputed questions of fact, this Court is of the clear view that this writ petition, in the light of
Patna High Court CWJC No.18994 of 2015 dt.04-07-2016
2/2
the disputed questions of fact, cannot be decided in a Public Interest Litigation.
In view of the above, and for the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court with appropriate application, in future, if so advised, and also to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible.
(I. A. Ansari, ACJ)
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)
K.C.jha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 5.7.2016 Transmission Date
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the facts disclosed in the writ petition capable of determination in a PIL?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ajay Kumar Rajak
Rameshwar Mahto
State of Bihar
Gudden Kumar Singh
Acting Chief Justice
Chakradhari Sharan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
