The High Court disposed of Public Interest Litigation No.323 of 2014 based on the petitioner's submission following a Ministry affidavit. The petition is treated as withdrawn.
The petition is disposed of as withdrawn; pending miscellaneous applications are closed.
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
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
Public Interest Litigation No.323 of 2014
Date: 24.8.2015
Between: Vaayu Vision Educational Society, Gudivada, Krishna District.
Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Environment, Forest, Science & Technology Department, Hyderabad and others.
… Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
Public Interest Litigation No.323 of 2014
PC: (Per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
We have perused the affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.4Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, dated 28.5.2015, in particular, paragraphs 5 to 9.
Having regard to the contents of the affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press this petition and seeks liberty to the petitioner to intervene in the proceedings pending before the National Green Tribunal in O.A. No. 15 of 2014.
The Public Interest Litigation is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed. All contentions of the petitioner are kept open.
Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications shall also stand closed.
____________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ
_________________ S.V. BHATT, J
24th August, 2015
Pnb
Vaayu Vision Educational Society
The State of Telangana
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
