Petitioner withdrew Public Interest Litigation No. 240 of 2015 following the superseding of the impugned Government Order by G.O.Ms.No.55 dated 23.10.2015. Court disposed of the petition with liberty to file fresh litigation against the new order.
Petition withdrawn with liberty to file fresh PIL challenging G.O.Ms.No.55 dated 23.10.2015.
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 S.V. BHATT
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 240 OF 2015
Date: 04.01.2016
Between:
Diya Sur
… Petitioner
And
State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forests, Science & Technology, Hyderabad and others
… Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 240 OF 2015
PC: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
Sri J. Krishna Dev, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that in view of the subsequent G.O.Ms.No.55, dated 23.10.2015, whereby the impugned G.O.Ms.No.29, dated 10.06.2015, has been superseded, he has instructions to withdraw the instant public interest litigation with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh public interest litigation challenging G.O.Ms.No.55, dated 23.10.2015.
Public interest litigation is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
_________________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ
________________________ S.V. BHATT, J
Date: 04.01.2016 ES
Diya Sur
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
