SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(AP) 586

BILAL NAZKI
Raji Reddy – Appellant
Versus
A. P. S. R. T. C. , Secunderabad – Respondent


BILAL NAZKI, J.

( 1 ) 121 petitioners filed this Writ petition by paying one set of Court-fee. Office has taken as objection;"please clarify as to how this W. P. is maintainable by paying a single set of Court-fee when there are 121 petitioners. "

( 2 ) THE counsel has replied the objection in the following terms;"last time we have filed two writ petitions by paying single Court-fee and matter is numbered and posted before the Hon ble Chief Justice Court. After hearing, directing the petitioners to file a fresh writ petition by rising all relevant points and accordingly the two Writ Petitions No. 27132 of 98 and 32450/98 were withdrawn. Hence this W. P. filed with all grounds. Therefore, this W. P. filed with permission of the Court in the aforesaid writ petition. Hence this W. P. may be numbered and post before Hon ble Court for admission. "office has sought orders from this Court as to whether single Court-fee is to be paid or the individual Court-fee has to be paid by each petitioner.

( 3 ) THE respondents have issued a notification which is published in local news papers on 31/03/1997. This notification has been challenged by all the petitioners. Therefore, the learned counsel f




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top