LexLords NRI Legal Services By NRI Legal Services LexLords

NRI legal services - https://lexlords.com/careers/. , FAZL ALl, MAHAJAN, MUKHERJEA, DAS and CHANDRASEKHARA AIYAR JJ. Now, the earlier ordinance, to which the present one is NRI Legal Services a subsequent addition by way of amendment, was passed by the Rajpramukh of Saurashtra on 2nd April, 1948. The appellants then made an application seeking their impleadment as respondents in the revision proceedings so that they could be heard in the matter. It is true that a Bench of two members must not lightly disregard the decision of another Bench of the same Tribunal on an identical question.

The determination of market value of lands by clubbing a number of cases together and passing a composite award is no award in the eyes of law. at the stage of giving direction to investigate into the complaint, such a sanction is not required. Act, is a quasi judicial exercise of power on the part of the Collector in awarding just and reasonable compensation to the landowners/cultivators. The Court took note of the provisions of Cr.

Against that order, appeal was heard by special leave. As can be seen from material on record, no individual notices were served upon the land owners/cultivators. it cannot certainly be a proper classification, Which requires that a reasonable relation must exist 462 between the classification and the objective that the legis- lation has in view. As has been stated already, section 11 of the Saurash- tra Ordinance is worded in exactly the same manner as sec- tion 5(1) of the West Bengal Special Courts Act; and that part of it, with which we are here concerned, authorises the State Government to direct any classes of offences or cases to be tried by the special tribunal.

The inquiry, as contemplated under Section 11 of the L. This Court set aside the order of the High Court permitting the appellants to be impleaded in the revision proceedings. I would be inclined to think that the West Bengal case, which we have decided already, comes within the purview of this principle, as the desira- bility of "speedier trial", which is hinted at in the pream- ble to the West Bengal Act, is too vague, elusive and uncer- tain a thing to amount to an enunciation of a definite policy or objective on the basis of which any proper classi- fication could be made.

) that in view of the provisions of article 329 (b) of the Constitution and sec. That has not been done in the instant case. The State Government, therefore, has got to make a classification of cases or offences before it issues its directions to the Special Court. 2005, the High Court dismissed that application. Paras Laminates (P) Ltd. No policy was indicated or object declared by the legislature, but an uncontrolled discretion was given to the Board of Supervi- sors who could refuse license at their pleasure to anybody carrying on laundry business in wooden buildings.

Held by the Full Court (PATANJALI SASTRI, C. 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the High Court had no jurisdiction to interfere with the order of the Returning Officer. The classification contemplated by the statute was an arbitrary classification depending on the caprice of the Board, and consequently it was condemned as discriminatory on the face of it;its application against the Chinese was a confirmation of the discriminatory character and the really hostile intention of the legislation.

As the factual score NRI Legal Services of the case at hand is concerned, it is noticeable that the trial court, on the basis of an oral prayer, had permitted the appellant to be heard along with the public prosecutor. [1990] INSC 234; (1990) 4 SCC 453 this Court has observed: (SCC pp. A joint inquiry appears to have been conducted by the Land Acquisition Collector without giving them an adequate opportunity to establish their claim for determination of reasonable compensation for acquisition of lands by presenting true and correct market value of the lands.

It is NRI Legal Services described as an ordinance to provide for the security of the State, mainte- nance of public order and maintenance of supplies and serv- ices essential to the community in the State of Saurashtra the matter has been left to the unfettered discretion of the State Government which can classify offences or cases in any way they like without regard to any objective and as such the statute is open to the challenge of making arbitrary discrimination. The point that requires consideration is, whether the Saurashtra Ordinance presents any distinguishing features or occupies the same position as the West Bengal Act ?

On the other hand, if the legislature indicates a definite objective and the discretion has been vested in the State Government as a means of achieving that object, the law itself, as I have said above, cannot be held to be discriminatory, though the action of the State Govern- ment may be condemned if it offends against the equal pro- tection clause, by making an arbitrary selection. If it depends entirely upon the pleasure of the State Government to make any classification it likes, with- out any guiding principle at all.

The respondent complainant filed a criminal revision petition thereagainst under Section 397 read with Section 401 CrPC before the High Court. Similar is the position in the third contingency. On this basis, the High Court has opined that since prior sanction is required only at the time of taking cognizance which stage comes much after the investigation is ordered under Section 156(3) of Cr. The question is, on what basis is the classification to be made ?

n461 harmless in itself and useful to the community.