This Public Interest Litigation on industrial demands was dismissed in limine as it appeared the petitioners made no prior demand for justice before filing the petition.
Petition closed; pending miscellaneous applications dismissed.
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.
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
Public Interest Litigation No. 106 of 2015
DATED:27.04.2015
Between:
Poojala Nageswara Rao, Kottapalli Village, Gokavaram Mandal, East Godavari District and another.
… Petitioners
And
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce Department, Hyderabad and others.
….Respondents
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
Public Interest Litigation No. 106 of 2015
Order: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
This Public Interest Litigation is closed as it appears from the statements and averments and the documents annexed to the petition that neither of the petitioners has made any demand of justice before filing of this petition. Of course, some representation has been made by some organization, with which the petitioner is not concerned at all.
It would be open for the petitioners, if so advised, to make a representation by demanding justice and thereafter they can approach this Court.
Pending miscellaneous applications shall also stand dismissed. No costs.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
SANJAY KUMAR, J
27th April, 2015
Pnb
Poojala Nageswara Rao and another
The State of Andhra Pradesh
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
