Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.20 seconds)Asian Resurfacing Of Road Agency P. Ltd. vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 28 March, 2018
12. In the present case, the challenge to the impugned show cause notice
is not on any of the aforesaid four grounds for the petitioner to maintain the
present writ petitions. Since, the impugned proceedings both in the writ
petitions being a show cause notice, to which, the petitioner ought to have
submitted his explanation, by taking all the available pleas open to him in law
and the petitioner instead of submitting an explanation, having assailed the
show cause notice before this court invoking writ jurisdiction relying on Rule
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/10/2025 03:39:23 pm )
WP Nos.32053/2013 & 1908 / 2019
54 of CISF Rules, conferring power on the Revisional Authority to pass an
order within a period of six months from the date of service of the order, which
is sought to be revised. In the fact of the present case, the order of the 5th
respondent is dated 31.05.2013. The petitioner even before the expiry of six
months time provided under the Rule 54 of the Rules on the 4th respondent
authority issuing Show Cause Notice seeking to revise the order passed by the
5th respondent assailed the same by filing a writ petition and also obtained an
order of stay from this court which is in force till date. Though the respondent
on account of the judgment of the Apex Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road
Agency (P) Ltd Vs. CBI, wherein, the Apex Court had held that order of stay
would stand vacated automatically on expiry of six months, claimed to have
issued the second show cause notice, in view of the subsequent decision of the
Apex Court, this Court is of the view that the second show cause notice dated
2/3.01.2019 as issued containing the same imputations as contained in show
cause notice dated 14.11.2013 which has been stayed by this Court is not
warranted; and that the respondent authorities are to be directed to proceed
only on the basis of the show cause notice issued earlier on 14.11.2013.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/10/2025 03:39:23 pm )
WP Nos.32053/2013 & 1908 / 2019
M/S Amrit Bazar Patrika Pvt. Ltd. ... vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 31 October, 2019
8. On behalf of the respondents, it is further contended that subsequently
the decision in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (P) Ltd Vs. CBI, has been
overruled by a court bench of the Apex Court in the case of High Court Bar
Association, Allahabad v. State of UP and others and as such, the challenge to
the show cause notice dated 14.11.2013 would continue to operate.
Whirlpool Corporation vs Registrar Of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors on 26 October, 1998
11. At the outset, it is to be noted that the challenge to the show cause
notice in a Writ Petition under Art.226 of the Constitution of India is limited
and can be maintained only on four grounds as enumerated by the Apex Court
in the decision of Whirlpool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Mark.
Mumbai and others 1998 (8) SCC 1, namely, 1. violation of principles of
natural justice 2. implementation of Fundamental Rights 3.where notice is
without jurisdiction and 4. vires of the Act under challenge.
1