Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.59 seconds)

Dir. Of Settlements, A.P. & Ors vs M.R. Apparao & Anr on 20 March, 2002

8. It is to be noted that in a Writ of Mandamus, there must be a subsisting right enforceable in a Court of Law on an individual. Equally, there must be a corresponding duty for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, as opined by this Court. Further, an aggrieved/affected party must have a legal right and he must aver that there is an infringement of public duty. At this stage, it may not be out of place for this Court to pertinently point out that in the decision of the DIRECTOR OF SETTLEMENTS, A.P AND OTHERS Vs. M.R.APPARAO AND ANOTHER {(2002) 4 SUPREME COURT CASES 638}, wherein it is held that 'the powers of the High Courts under Art.226 of the Constitution of India though a discretionary one and no limits can be placed upon their discretion, they must be exercised along with recognised lines and subject to certain self-imposed limitations'.
Supreme Court of India Cites 43 - Cited by 489 - Full Document
1   2 Next