Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, J
Deepak Yadav S/o Shri Gajraj Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
Judgment / Order
JUDGMENT :
1. This writ petition is filed with following prayers:
2. The petitioners have come out with a plea that although, the respondent No.4-Board of Infrastructure Development and Investment Promotion took a decision in its meeting dated 10.08.2007 to allot the subject piece of land in favour of the respondent No.7, i.e., International Amusement Limited; but, the allotment letter and possession letter were issued in favour of the respondent No.8-International Amusement and Infrastructure Private Limited; both having different identities.
3. However, the memo of the writ petition does not reflect locus of the petitioners to assail the aforesaid action. Despite repeated requests of this Court, learned counsel for the petitioners is not able to satisfy as to violation of any of their legal or fundamental right under the orders impugned in the writ petition.
4. It is trite law that to maintain a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has to plead and establish breach of his legal and/or fundamental right or a corresponding legal obligation upon the respondent qua him. A Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in t
A writ petition under Article 226 requires the petitioner to demonstrate a personal legal grievance or injury, which the petitioners failed to establish.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that for the grant of a writ of mandamus, it is essential to establish the existence of a legal right and its infringement. The duty sought to b....
Point of Law : As such the petitioner has no locus standi to file the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Even otherwise having regard to the facts and circumstances....
A petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India lies only for enforcement of a fundamental or legal right, and lack of locus standi and failure to demonstrate infringement of fundamental or....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that where a complete machinery/remedy for obtaining relief is provided in statute and such machinery and remedy fully covers the grievance of the ....
The jurisdiction to challenge actions of the Jaipur Development Authority under the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982, is maintainable under Article 227 of the Constitution, not Article 226.
The High Court can entertain a writ petition despite the availability of an alternative remedy if the order is arbitrary or unjust, emphasizing the need for fairness in administrative actions.
Point of Law : Territorial jurisdiction - Prior to Constitutional (Fifteenth Amendment Act, 1963, concept of cause of action was alien for adjudication of disputes by High Court under Article 226 of ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
