Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union Of India And ORS




    
    

!"

#$ %& Date of Decision: 13.08.2018 Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan (Regd.) .....Petitioner versus Union of India and others .....Respondents  %'  ()%

 *
+
*%


,
  *
    ()%

 *


 ))
,  Present :

Mr. M.L.Saggar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sunny Saggar, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** +
*%


,  $-& This writ petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner claiming to be a National Organization of Interstate Migrant Labour.

2.

Challenge has been made to an election held on 28.03.2016 of the Town Vending Committee of Chandigarh under section 22 of the Street Vendors Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending Act, 2014 and Chandigarh Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Protection of Vending) Rules, 2015.

3.

After hearing the matter, the predecessor Bench passed the following order on 04.08.2016:6
   

     

                                             !"

 #   $ !    % &      '



              (  %

  

               

  %   % % '

%  

      

     %    '       

      !"

 #  $ ! %    %   

  )      %   '



         %  !"

 #   $ !#   

       "

 #   $  '

   

    % !"

 #   *    +  !  ,   !"

 #  $ +  !    !"

 Ravinder Sharma 2018.08.17 13:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

  

!"

#$ %&./   #  *   !    

   ' -.  

(   / 01  4.

Thereafter the matter was adjourned on the request made by learned counsel for the petitioner on various dates and ultimately on 04.07.2017 the Court noticing that despite time having been allowed on number of occasions to demonstrate that the petitioner has locus standi to file the Public Interest Litigation, no one appears on the date and thus it was dismissed in default. However, subsequently the Public Interest Litigation was restored to its original number on an application made on behalf of the petitioner. Today, when the matter was called out, we repeatedly asked learned counsel for the petitioner to establish its locus to maintain the Public Interest Litigation and also to demonstrate that funds that are being maintained by the Pravasi Bhalai Trust and how the petitioner claims to be a wing of the said trust, as required vide order dated 04.08.2016, we regret in recording that our repeated queries with respect to the locus of the petitioner have remained unanswered and necessary material as required vide order dated 04.08.2016 has also not been brought on record. 5.

The petitioner having failed to establish its locus to maintain this Public Interest Litigation, it is not liable to be entertained at its behest and same accordingly stands dismissed.








 






  





















  
 




 


 !"

Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No√ Ravinder Sharma 2018.08.17 13:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document