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

1996 Supreme(AP) 160

V.SIVARAMAN NAIR
Gopalan – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad – Respondent


V. SIVARAMAN NAIR, J.

( 1 ) THERE is conflict of perception of a problem, the problem of dealing with stray dogs in the twin Cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad and remedial measures to be adopted to solve that problem, between an individual and a public authority and this conflict is carried to this Court for consideration and resolution by way of this writ petition, styled as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner is one J. Gopalan. He claims to be an Engineer by profession and he is a permanent resident of Hyderabad for the past 30 years. The petitioner has stated that he has filed this PIL to espouse the cause of the residents of the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad.

( 2 ) THE Respondent No. 1 is the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, for short the Corporation ; the second respondent is Smt. Rachel Chatterjee who was the Commissioner of the Corporation at the relevant time and the third respondent is Blue Cross represented by its Chair-Person Smt. Amala Akkineni. After the writ petition was filed in this Court on 17-10-1994, the A. P. Jeeva-raksha Sangam represented by its Secretary Peela Ramakrishna was impleaded as ad












































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