Not Known Factual Statements About Advocate In Chandigarh

We can see no reason for thinking that such a provision is not within the competence of the Legislature. We think that no such compelling reasons are available from the provisions of the Act; on the contrary, they point really one way-that the Act contemplates an existing or continuing Advocates (go to my site) industry and not a dead industry. There is also no provision for appeal against his order to the Advocates - visit this website - court. But it is to be observed that the legislature does not purport to do anything of the kind.

This was exactly the period within which the amendment of 1939 Act made in 1953 was in force, abolishing the right of suit and making the scheme as determined by the Commissioner final and conclusive. The notice, it is true, refers to the appellant being a member of the Communist Party and to his activities in the trade union. Such a pro- vision is not uncommon in legislative practice, and is enacted in order to avoid the public inconvenience of having to re-do what has previously been done.

But what the legislature has purported to do is to take up those very schemes and deem them to have been settled under the _provisions of the present Act and thereby to lay them open to any attack available under the present law. In view of the same, we have no shadow of doubt that the High Court has fallen into error by permitting the accused persons to file an application Section 91 Cr. The scheme can certainly be settled to ensure due administration of the endowed property but the objection seems to be that the Act provides for the framing of a scheme not by a civil court or under its supervision but by Advocates (visit this website) the Commissioner, who is a' mere administrative or executive officer.

If it fails this time it is not because the right and the remedy under 59 article 32 have been taken Advocates - visit this website, away or affected but because the unconstitutionality has been removed. But there is no substance in that suggestion. There must indeed be found very compelling reasons in the words of the statute before it can be held that such was the intention of the legislature. Section 79-A in terms purports to revive the invalid scheme notwith- 8 58 standing any judgment, decree or order of any court, which means that though a court may have pronounced the scheme as void still that is deemed to be alive.

It has been suggested that this is directly flouting the decision of this Court and that the legislature has no power to declare as valid and constitutional what was decided by this Court as invalid and unconstitutional. 25FF was enacted were themselves incorrect and must be overruled. We are also unable to agree with the argument of the appellants based on the charges made against the appellant in Civil Appeal No. What it does is not to deem the schemes previously settled as having been validly settled on those very dates, under the then existing law.

Sections 38 and 39 of the Act must, therefore, be held to Advocates; visit this website, be invalid". This of course is beyond legislative competence since the legislature has not the power to override unconstitutionality as such. But it is not the necessary attribute either of a Communist or a trade unionist that he should indulge in subversive activities, and when action was taken against the appellant under the rules, it was not because he was a 1064 Communist or a trade unionist, but because he was engaged in subversive activities.

4(1), the matters dealt with under s. 46 of 1956 in the notice dated July 6, 1950, that the expression "subversive activities " is wide enough to take in lawful activities as well, and must therefore be held to be unreasonable for purposes of classification under Art. We hold that the Security Rules are not illegal as being repugnant -to ,a Art. It is also a recognised principle of construction that general words and phrases however wide and comprehensive they may be in their literal sense must usually be construed as being limited to the actual objects of the Act.

Although on such construction, S. 25FF becomes largely redundant, no question of any hardship arises as the judicial decisions on the basis of which S. Section 79-A, therefore, is not open to any objection on the ground of legislative incompetence. There is no evidence that the actual object of the Act in the present case was to extend the powers of the Municipalities to imposing the tax on articles which were in the course of transit.

In nutshell, the case set up by the respondents was that the construction of Bus Depot is contrary to Master Plan; it would affect the ecology and environment of the area; by ignoring the same the appellants were violating the principle of Puyblic Trust, principle of Sustainable Development, Polluter Pays Principle, Principle of Inter-Generational Equity; and all this amounted to infuriation of Articles 21, 48A, 51A of the Constitution.

The result of section 79-A is to treat the schemes framed within the specified period as schemes framed immediately after the commencement of the present Act and to impute thereto, by a fiction, compliance with the various procedural and other steps which are requisite under section 42. The right of any person to seek remedy under article 32 in respect of any violation of his fundamental rights is in no way curtailed or affected by the fact that an actual decision of this Court on an application under article 32 is, in effect, nullified by appropriate and competent legislative measures.

25F applies only to an existing industry and s. can be taken aid of by the accused persons. 28 to 32 fall not within Entry 31 of List II but within Entries 5 and 2 respectively of List III, and to that extent, the legislation is on matters enumerated in the Concurrent List. In the case at hand, the learned Magistrate was directed by the High Court to consider the application filed by the Assistant Public Prosecutor seeking withdrawal of the application earlier preferred under Section 321 Cr.

It is also true that it is not unlawful to be either a Communist or a trade unionist. Against this decision of the Tribunal, there was an appeal to the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India at Bombay. We think that the settling of a scheme in regard to a religious institution by an executive officer without the intervention of any judicial tribunal amounts to an unreasonable restriction upon the right of property of the superior of the religious institution which is blended with his office.

Chatterjee for the appellant is that though the Act is within the competence of the Provincial Legislature in so far as it prohibits possession, sale, consumption, etc. Learned counsel for the appellants have also adverted to some surprising results which would follow the wider interpretation of the definition clause. If an employer dies and his heirs carry on the business or there is compulsory winding up of a company and the company is reconstructed or a business is converted into a limited company, or a new partner is taken into the business, there is in law a termination of service by a particular employer and a new employer appears on the scene; will the workmen in such circumstances be entitled to retrenchment compensation though they continue in service as before ?

The Appellate Tribunal came to the conclusion that the respondents were entitled to claim bonus; it expressed the view that on the decision of this Court in D. In such a situation, it is difficult to appreciate how Section 91 of Cr. It has been suggested that this is really interfering with the jurisdiction of this Court under article 32. Indeed, the right has been, in fact, successfully invoked on the prior occasion and has again been invoked on the present occasion.