Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
53 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
- 3rd side (hint)
|
Ashadevi v K Shivraj
|
Gold smuggler detention
|
Detention set aside - material facts not known to decider - now lawyer present/non-prodn for bail
|
|
|
Gordhandas Bhanji
|
Cinema construction license
|
Only Comm had power to cancel license once granted - State Govt. direction not competent - specific relief u/s. 54 granted
|
|
|
CPIO SC v Subhash Chandra Agarwal
|
RTI - comms among SC Js re: appointments/transfer - rejected
|
Ref. to Const. bench.
|
|
|
HD Vora
|
Land requisition lasting beyond reasonable time period
|
|
|
|
L Chandra Kumar
|
(1) 42 Am empowering leg removal of judicial review on certain issues (2) tribunal power to declare vires (3) appeals proc.
|
(1) JR a basic feature - cannot be excluded (2) tribunals not ind and can't replace judiciary (3) can declare vires ( but not of parent statute (4) trib > hc div > sc (slp)
|
|
|
Om Kumar v UOI
|
Disproportionate punishments to DDA officers
|
Proportionality review = illegality OR patently unreasonable (Wednesbury) - arbitrariness/discrimination distinction
|
|
|
Gurdial Singh
|
Land acquired 'urgently' to vent vengeance of minister
|
Acting with purpose inconsistent/extraneous to power-granting act - ground for review
|
|
|
Ram Manohar Lohia v Bihar
|
Order not made in terms of empowering rule u/Def. of India Act
|
"Public safety" u/Act != law and order > invalid order
|
|
|
Delhi Laws Act, Re
|
Validity - 2 acts providing power to extend laws to respective areas - Part C States Act also enabling repeal/am of existing law
|
Repeal/am = essential leg f(n), can't delegate - rest valid
|
|
|
Ram Jawaya Kapur
|
Executive power commensurate with govt. power - prior legislation not required
|
|
|
|
Cynamide India
|
Drug price fixing w/o hearing
|
Legislative action (general) vs admin (particular) - price fixing is legislative > no PNJ attracted
|
|
|
TN v Sabanayagam
|
Validity of notification exempting govt. officers from bonuses
|
Conditional legislation vs delegation - 3 types of CL (enforcement/withdrawal/balancing interests) - objective satisfaction reqd. in 3rd type
|
|
|
Saraswati Devi
|
Objections to schemes u/MV Act
|
Personal objections admissible for comparing existing service to proposed scheme
|
|
|
Bhatija v Collector
|
.
|
.
|
|
|
Raj Narain Singh v Chairman, Patna
|
Delegated authority's power to pick any section it chooses out of the Bihar and Orissa Municipal Act of 1922 and extend it to Patna + Governor's power to restrict/modify
|
Intra-vires - r&m could not change policy
|
|
|
DS Garewal
|
Superintendent's demotion - challenge to AIS Act - ought to have been made by Parl
|
Art. 312 - Parl's lawmaking power does not exclude delegation
|
|
|
Hamdard Dawakhana
|
Gov't power to add to list of diseases wrt advertisements for magic remedies
|
ultra vires - no guidelines stated for adding/omitting
|
|
|
Gwalior Rayon Co v Sales Tax Comm
|
CST set at 10% OR state rate, whichever higher - challenge - Legislature should fix top-rate
|
Intra vires - minimum rate set > sufficient guideline - Parl can't set local rates anyway
|
|
|
Lachmi Narain
|
Notified r/m 6 years after Act - replaced 3 month notice with satisfactory notice
|
Ultra-vires - r&m only at time of extension and only for adapting/adjusting
|
|
|
Harishankar Bagla
|
Delegated & sub-delegated power to require licenses/permits for essential commodities - order re: cotton textiles
|
Intra-vires - policy to maintain/increase E.C. supply
|
|
|
Kerala SEB
|
Electricity made essential article - Order allowing surcharge collection from long-term contractors
|
Power to determine 'essentiality' - conditional legislation - i.v.
|
|
|
MK Papiah
|
Power to set excise-tax rate - no guidance
|
UV - Mathew's 'abdication' test - repeal power maintained
|
|
|
Air India v Nergesh Meerza
|
a. termination for marriage in 4 years of starting; b. termination on first pregnancy; c. retired at 45, not 58; d. MD's option to extend
|
a + b. struck down - discriminatory; c. maintained; d. no option - must extend for 10 years if fit
|
|
|
BS Yadav v State of Haryana
|
High Court's 'control' of subordinate u/a. 235
|
Only rule-making power - must acquire force of law by being consonant with/authorized by State Legislation
|
|
|
Chintaman Rao v MP
|
Deputy Commissioner's power to prohibit bidi manufacture for seasons/villages
|
Excessive delegation and violates 19(1)(g)
|
|
|
Dwarka Nath v MCD
|
Rules requiring manufacturers to print 'Batch codes' and 'Serial numbers' on products
|
Beyond scope of gov't power u/PF Act to set packing std for avoiding consumer confusion
|
|
|
Harla v State of Rajasthan
|
(Colonial Jaipur Opium Act) - Mandatory to publish Acts in the Gazette - action taken thereunder is invalid unless the Act is publishe
|
|
|
|
Himat Lal v Police Comm
|
R's power to regulate public assembies - rule requiring written permission to protest
|
Act i.v. but rule u.v. - no guidelines for refusing/granting perm
|
|
|
Maharashtra Ed Board v Paritosh
|
Examinees' rights to see marksheets/ask for re-val - vires of rules limiting review to re-totaling
|
No right based on p.n.j. - i.v. since Act empowered Board to do so
|
|
|
Narendra Kumar v UOI
|
Non-ferrous metal price control - no principles notified/non-compliance with laying procedure
|
Ineffective w/o principles being set out
|
|
|
Raza Buland
|
Hindi paper/Urdu paper
|
Substantial compliance sufficed
|
|
|
V Sudeer v BCI
|
74 Am removed R's ability to impose bar-exam/pre-enrolment training
|
Ultra-vires
|
|
|
Ridge v Baldwin
|
Policeman arrested twice, found not guilty both times. Watch Committee dismissed him without hearing.
|
"Watch Committee was bound to observe natural justice - tell him about charge and give him opportunity to defend.
|
|
|
Tulsiram Patel
|
(1) Art. 311 - PNJ only to be denied to public servant when (i) convicted of crime (ii) auth believes it's not feasible (iii) national security reasons. Would still have court access - (2) Defense - info/cross-x/representation
|
|
|
|
J Mohapatra v Orissa
|
Library books selection - Submitting authors on committee - HC held Selection Committee was appointed by Govt. reso - no chance of changing (PNJ practically impossible). SC overruled - could disclose bias to get reso amended.
|
PNJ outweighed when: (1) no other competent person (2) no quorum possible w/o person (3) no competent tribunal can be set up
|
|
|
AK Yadav v Haryana
|
HC pronouncing on selections by Punjab Civil Service Board w/o hearing selectors violated PNJ.
|
|
|
|
GN Nayak v Goa University
|
Teaching position given after interview involving person who had lauded interviewee's work in past - high personal interest bias std. not met.
|
|
|
|
Pinochet, Re
|
Lord Hoffman's assn. with Amnesty > non-pecuniary "ideological" bias seen in hearing Pinochet's appeal.
|
|
|
|
Bombay v KP Krishnan
|
Workplace bonus demand conciliation - after conciliator filed failure rept. Govt. didn't arbitrate - HC said this is punitive - SC said only if done on extraneous/irrelevant considerations.
|
|
|
|
GN Rao v AP
|
Objections to transport scheme heard by proponent Home Sec. himself - njics
|
|
|
|
UP v Mohammad Nooh
|
Forged appointment letter enquiry - judge became witness then used own testimony to dismiss R (LOL) - PNJ obviously violated.
|
|
|
|
Al Rawi
|
No closed-material procedure in crim trial - violates PNJ as one party is completely unable to participate in a part of trial (cross-ex etc)
|
|
|
|
Olga Tellis
|
Presumption of notice requirement - futility of hearing not an answer
|
|
|
|
HN Mishra v RM College Principal
|
Written DC hearing w/o c-ex, witnesses heard in absentia
|
PNJ not violated - reasonable compliance given gender concerns
|
|
|
JK Aggarwal v Haryana Seeds DC
|
Disco for charges involving dismissal from service - legal rep must be allowed, esp. to avoid unequal arms
|
|
|
|
BPCL v MGKU
|
Standing Orders allowing only co-workers, not TU members to represent in discos
|
PNJ not violated - co-workers well placed to represent - no legal formality involved
|
|
|
Maneka Gandhi v UOI
|
.
|
.
|
|
|
SN Mukherjee
|
COAS/Gov't's decision on mercy petition after Court-martial
|
No reasoned order required - removed by necessary implication
|
|
|
Rohtas Industries v SD Agarwal
|
Order u.v. - Governmentdid not indicate a clear ground based on which it suspected theCompany |
. |
|
|
S Pratap Singh v Punjab
|
Blitz article tarnishing CM by gov't civil surgeon - leave revoked, suspension and enquiry
|
Mala fides - CM's personal grudge
|
|
|
CBSE v Aditya Bandyopadhyaya
|
CBSE examinees can access answer sheets u/RTI Act at RTI rates
|
|
|
|
ICAI v SH Satya
|
(1) examination bodies can disclose the question papers, model answers and instructions after exam is held; (2) no infringement of copyright in seeing State's documents
|
|
|
|
Jasbir Singh Chhabra v State of Punjab
|
local authority invited applications for allotment of residential plots by draw of lots, but specified that the land not yet been diverted for residential purposes; its acceptance of earnest money did not oblige it to make an allotment,
|
no legitimate expectation found
|
