Skip to content
Indian Liberals
Filter:

Tip: search runs across all languages; results are tokenised per-page using the document's lang attribute. Search inside the documents →

legal filing

Notice of Motion No. 1995 in Writ Petition No. 14 of 1995

Bombay · 1995

4 pages

Summary

This four-page English court filing is a Notice of Motion in Writ Petition No. 14 of 1995 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. Swatantra Party (Maharashtra), through its General Secretary L. R. Sampat, and petitioner S. V. Raju, seek relief against the Union of India, the Chief Election Commissioner of India, and the Secretary of the Election Commission of India.

The motion asks the Court to direct provisional registration of the party without insisting on compliance with Section 29-A of the Representation of the People Act. Alternatively, it requests an interim stay against enforcement of that requirement, or an early final hearing of the writ petition before 30 October 1995. The notice identifies the scheduled hearing as 22 September 1995 before Justices Agarwal and Majithia, and states that advocate Rajiv Patil is acting for the petitioners. The rendered pages contain no factual affidavit or substantive judicial reasoning beyond the reliefs requested and the procedural details of the motion.

Key points

  • The document is a September 1995 Notice of Motion in Bombay High Court Writ Petition No. 14 of 1995.
  • Swatantra Party (Maharashtra), L. R. Sampat, and S. V. Raju are identified as petitioners.
  • The respondents include the Union of India and officials of the Election Commission of India.
  • The principal relief sought is provisional registration of the political party without compliance with Section 29-A of the Representation of the People Act.
  • The alternative relief seeks an interim stay restraining the respondents from insisting on compliance with Section 29-A.
  • The petitioners also request an early final hearing before 30 October 1995.
  • The notice records a scheduled hearing on 22 September 1995 before Justices Agarwal and Majithia.

Metadata and summary are AI-extracted from the source PDF and reviewed for editorial accuracy. The original work is available via the Read PDF tab above (where present); paragraph-level citation inside the PDF is deferred to a future engagement.

Related across the archive