Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.20 seconds)Section 13 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 11 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
Article 19 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 163 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Hari Krishna Mandir Trust vs State Of Maharashtra . on 7 August, 2020
21. Admittedly, there is no statutory or constitutional prohibition
preventing a holder of public office from pursuing artistic or cultural activities,
so long as such activities do not interfere with official duties or violate any law.
The Petitioner has failed to place any material demonstrating that the conduct
of Respondent No. 5 is in violation of any constitutional provision, statutory
mandate or a binding rule. It is well settled and reiterated by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in clear terms in Hari Krishna Mandir Trust v. State of
Maharashtra,3 that a statutory duty towards the applicant must exist before it
can be enforced through Mandamus. Unless a statutory duty or right can be
read in the provision, Mandamus cannot be issued to enforce the same.
Therefore, the relief of declaration as sought in this regard is untenable.