The Court closed the writ petition without passing any order as the issue was already pending in another writ petition (W.P.No.33446 of 2010), granting liberty to the petitioner to take steps as advised.
Petition closed without order; liberty granted to petitioner to take steps as advised.
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, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 449 of 2013
Date: 21.04.2014
Between:
P. Chandramanikyam
… Petitioner
And
The Govt., of A.P., rep., by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (ii) Department, Hyderabad, & others.
… Respondents
This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 449 of 2013
ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
We should not proceed with the matter in view of the fact that the issue involved herein is also involved in another writ petition, being W.P.No.33446 of 2010, filed by the un-official respondent. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed without passing any order. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to take steps in accordance with law, as may be advised. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand dismissed.
___________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
___________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J
Date: 21.04.2014 ES
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.No.33446 of 2010Referred¶15
P. Chandramanikyam
The Govt., of A.P.
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta
Sanjay Kumar
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
