The PIL was disposed of as not pressed. The court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation on merits within three months and produced a copy of the order within ten days.
Respondent to consider the representation within three months; Petitioner to produce order copy within ten days.
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 ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
PIL No. 264 OF 2015
21-09-2015
Between:
Mr. Jeediginjala Venkatesh
… Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana, through its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration having its office at Secretariat, Hyderabad and others
… Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
PIL No. 264 OF 2015
PC: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice S.V.Bhatt)
Learned counsel for the petitioner does not press this public interest litigation (PIL) and seeks direction to the concerned respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 2308-2015 within time frame.
PIL is disposed of as not pressed. Respondent No.3 shall consider the petitioner’s representation dated 23-08-2015 on merits in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this order along with a copy of the PIL and its annexures before the concerned authority within ten days from today.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand disposed of.
_________________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ
________________________
21-09-2015 ks
Mr. Jeediginjala Venkatesh
State of Telangana and others
Dilip B. Bhosale
S.V. Bhatt
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
