Dismissed
P. Narendhar Reddy, v. The State of Telangana
Telangana HCPIL/214/2015
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE…
What the court decided
AI extract
CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE…
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.214 of 2015
Dt:04.01.2016
Between: P.Narender Reddy. … Petitioner And The State of Telangana 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.214 of 2015
PC: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
None appears for the petitioner.
Heard learned Government Pleader-Irrigation for respondent Nos.1 to 5; learned Government Pleader-Mines and Geology for respondent Nos.6 and 7; learned Government Pleader-Revenue for respondent Nos.8 to 10; Sri L.Ravi Chander, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.11, Sri G.Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.12; Sri Ravi Kiran Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.13 and Sri P.Srinivas, learned counsel for respondent No.14.
Sri Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.12, at the outset, invited our attention to counter-affidavit and paragraph ‘5’ thereof, in particular, to contend that the instant PIL is not in public interest and it is filed by one of the employees of his client’s competitor. In other words, he submitted that employer of the petitioner had also participated in the tender process and having lost, he filed the instant PIL through his employee-petitioner. The petitioner has not disclosed these facts in the PIL.
In view thereof, we are not inclined to entertain this PIL. Order accordingly. We also record statement of learned Government
Pleader-Mines and Geology that notice has been issued to respondent No.12 for recovery of seigniorage charges and respondent Nos.6 and 7 will take the notice to its logical conclusion. His statement is recorded and accepted.
In the circumstances, the PIL is disposed of for non-prosecution. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand disposed of.
_________________________
________________________ S.V. BHATT, J Dt:04.01.2016 kdl
P. Narender Reddy
The 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