With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 1990, writ denied); Thiel v. Oaks, 535 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex.Civ.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1976, no writ); Allen v. Fisher, 118 Tex. 38, 9 S.W.2d 731, 732 (1928). When the plaintiff, as a private citizen, asserts a public, as distinguished from a private right, and his complaint fails to show the subject matter of the litigation affects him differently from other citizens, he does not establish a justiciable interest. See Tri County Citizens Rights Org. v. Johnson, 498 S.W.2d 227, 229 (Tex.Civ.App.—Austin 1973, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Blum argues the issue of standing is not before this Court because appellees failed to raise the issue in the proceeding below. To support his argument, Blum cites Texas Indus. Traffic League v. Railroad Comm’n of Texas, 633 S.W.2d 821, 823 (Tex.1982) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). The Texas Supreme Court has expressly

A: holding the issue of standing is waived if not asserted at the district court level
B: holding that where plaintiff fails to raise issue of timeliness of departments hearing at administrative level the issue is waived on appeal
C: holding that issue waived when the defendant failed to ask the court to make a discretionary call of any factual dispute regarding the issue of same criminal conduct and he did not contest the issue at the trial level
D: holding individual standing issue waived
A.