Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 36 (0.59 seconds)
All India Pet Coke Calciners Ass vs The Union Of India & Ors on 18 September, 2012 cites

Balco Employees Union (Regd.) vs Union Of India & Ors on 10 December, 2001

61. Recently also, the Apex Court in the case of Bajaj Hindustan limited Vs. Shadilal Enterprises Limited, [(2011)1 SCC 640], has clearly held that the scope of judicial review of 72 Patna High Court CWJC No.10902 of 2012 dt.18-09-2012 72 / 100 decisions of the executive or legislative authorities in economic matters is very limited. After noticing paragraphs 92 and 93 of BALCO (Supra), and some other judgments, findings of the Court in respect of judicial review and applicability of doctrine of legitimate expectations were as follows :
Supreme Court of India Cites 48 - Cited by 1192 - Full Document

Tata Cellular vs Union Of India on 26 July, 1994

45. Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Tata Cellular Vs. Union of India [(1994)6 SCC 651], in the line of judgments in issue, in chronology, was relied upon by Mr. Kanth, appearing for Respondent no.10. He placed several paragraphs of this judgment, which contains elaborate discussion on the scope of judicial review in reference to English decision also, and drew the attention of this Court to paragraph 80 thereof in which the Apex Court has noticed Wednesbury Principle of reasonableness, as appearing in Supreme Court Practice 1993(1) PP. 849-850, and has reproduced the same in the following manner :
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 3275 - S Mohan - Full Document

Sterling Computers Limited Etc vs M & N Publications Limited And Ors on 12 January, 1993

54. Above referred judgments, relied upon by the parties on the issue, shows that, in matters of policy decision, Courts cannot look into the wisdom of the policy maker and cannot substitute its own views. It cannot weigh the comparative merits of the alternative policies placed before it for consideration. The only scope for the Courts to interfere with the policy, in exercise of powers of judicial review, is available on the ground of same being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, which necessarily means that it must be found to be arbitrary, irrational, unreasonable, capricious etc. and/or violative of any statutory 59 Patna High Court CWJC No.10902 of 2012 dt.18-09-2012 59 / 100 provision or constitutional mandate. The judgment of Mahabir Auto (Supra), Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi (Supra) and Sterling Computers (Supra), and the particular paragraphs of the judgments, relied upon by learned senior counsel for the petitioners, only show this much that, wherever the above conditions or any one of them is found to exist, the Courts must interfere, in exercise of the powers of judicial review, and strike down the decision.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 386 - N P Singh - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next