AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Apoorva Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Gagan Tiwari, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the
respondents No. 1, 2, 4 and 5 as well as Mr. Abhishek Chandra Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.
Learned counsel for the parties submit that this public interest litigation is covered by the judgment dated 08.02.2022 passed in WP(PIL) No. 20 of
2022 and this petition may be disposed of accordingly.
This Court, in WP(PIL) No. 20 of 2022, at paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 observed as follows:
“6. Rule 80(1) of the Rules of 2007, reads as follows:
“80(1) If a proceeding in the nature of Public Interest Litigation has already been entertained and is pending no other petition or communication
relating to the same matter shall be entertained. Any person wishing to place any other facet of the same matter before the Court, may accordingly
apply for directions in the pending matter.â€
When the fundamental issue raised in this public interest litigation is same with that of an already pending public interest litigation, name of school
hardly has any relevance.
In view of provisions of Rule 80(1) of the Rules of 2007, we do not entertain this petition. If the petitioner wishes to place any other facet of the
matter before the Court, he may accordingly apply for directions in the pending matter.â€
In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.