In P.I.L. No. 406 of 2013, this Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the non-bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh due to apprehension of lawlessness. The Court observed that it could not pass orders without a government decision and directed petitioners to make representations.
Petition disposed without passing any order.
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.
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
P.I.L.No.406 of 2013
Date: 02.09.2013
Between:
M.Shaikshah Vali and another
.....Petitioners
AND
The Union of India, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, New Delhi and others.
...Respondents
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
P.I.L.No.406 of 2013
ORDER: (per Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta )
In our view, going by the statement made by the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, who says that the Government has not taken any decision for bifurcation of the State of Andhra Pradesh, this Court cannot not pass any order on this writ petition on the apprehension of the petitioners. If the petitioners feel that there is lawlessness and there is no proper administration in the State, it is open for the petitioners to make a representation to the Government giving suggestions.
With the aforesaid liberty, we dispose of this petition without passing any order.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.
___________________ SENGUPTA, CJ
02.09.2013 Gsn
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court can pass orders in the absence of a government decision on bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh.
Whether the apprehension of lawlessness justifies judicial intervention in the pending writ petition.
M. Shaikshah Vali and another
The Union of India
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta
K.C. Bhanu
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
