Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.25 seconds)

M/S. Mangalam Organics Ltd vs Union Of India on 24 April, 2017

4. The creation of post and disbandment of post are purely an http://www.judis.nic.in Page 2 of 5 W.P.No.19618 & 19620 of 2009 administrative discretion of the Government and the petitioners cannot have a right to demand either for creation of a post nor there can be a grievance against disbandment of post. The learned counsel for the respondents states that G.O.(Ms)No.221, School Education (R1) Department, dated 27.08.2009 has been acted upon. It is well settled that a Writ Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, should not interfere with the decision of the State unless the policy decision is totally perverse. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mangalam Organics Limited Vs. Union of India, (2017) 7 SCC 221, held as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 25 - Cited by 28 - A K Sikri - Full Document

Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) ... vs Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) ... on 10 March, 1978

"39. The matter can be looked into from another angle as well. When “power” is given to the Central Government to issue a notification to the effect not to recover duty of excise or recover lesser duty than what is normally payable under the Act, for deciding whether to issue such a notification or not, there may be various considerations in the mind of the Government. Merely because conditions laid in the said provisions are satisfied, would not be a reason to necessarily issue such a notification. It is purely a policy matter. No doubt, the principle against arbitrariness has been extended to subordinate legislation as well [see Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) (P) Ltd. v. Union of India [Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, (1985) 1 SCC 641 : 1985 SCC (Tax) 121] ]. At the same time, the scope of judicial review in such cases is very limited. Where the statute vests a discretionary power in an administrative authority, the court would not interfere with the exercise of such discretion unless it is made with oblique end or extraneous purposes or upon extraneous considerations, or arbitrarily, without applying its mind to the relevant considerations, or where it is not guided by any norms which are relevant to the object to be achieved."
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 129 - V R Iyer - Full Document
1