Public interest litigation petitioners sought withdrawal and were granted liberty to initiate further proceedings. The court disposed of the PIL as withdrawn with no costs.
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 AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 148 of 2014
Date: 20.06.2016
Between:
T. Narayana Rao & another.
… Petitioners
And
The State of A.P., rep., by its Chief Secretary, General Administration (Service) Department, Hyderabad & others.
… Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 148 of 2014
ORDER: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
Sri R. Mahanti, learned counsel for the petitioners, prays for withdrawal of the public interest litigation with liberty to file appropriate proceedings on behalf of the petitioners and the other aggrieved persons.
Public interest litigation is disposed of as withdrawn. It is open to the petitioners and/or any other aggrieved persons to file appropriate proceedings for redressal of their grievance and if any such proceedings are filed, we hope and trust that the concerned forum shall consider the same on merits in accordance with law.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
_______________________ DILIP B.BHOSALE, ACJ
__________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J
Date: 20.06.2016 ES
T. Narayana Rao
State of A.P.
Dilip B. Bhosale
P. Naveen Rao
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
