The Bench dismissed the writ petition at the threshold. The court held that the complaint was based merely on apprehension without concrete proof and alongside the existence of government redressal directions, rendering the petition non-maintainable at this stage.
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.
S. B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2228/2008 PREMA RAM & OTHERS. V. THE STATE OF RAJ. & OTHERS.
DATE OF ORDER ::: 04/04/2008
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI
Mr. Pritam Solanki, for Petitioner (s).
The redressal of grievance raised by the petitioner herein has been given otherwise by the competent authority at Annexture-4 which provides that no statue should be installed till necessary directions are given by the Government. In view of the above, it is not clear as to why this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite of the order at Annexure-4, petitioner is having apprehension of installation of statue in disregard to Annexure-4. Merely on such apprehension, this writ petition cannot be maintained. It is, however, made clear that if any concrete comes, then the petitioners will be at liberty to approach this Court again.
In view of the observations made above, this writ petition is dismissed at this stage.
(M. N. BHANDARI), J.
scd
scd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition based purely on apprehension of installing a statue in disregard to government directions is maintainable.
PREMA RAM & OTHERS
THE STATE OF RAJ. & OTHERS
MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
