Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 40 (0.26 seconds)
Charutar Arogya Mandal And Ors. vs Justice R.J. Shah (Retd.) Fee Committee ... on 16 March, 2005 cites

State Of U.P. And Ors vs Renusagar Power Co. And Others on 28 July, 1988

11.1 It was submitted that the Supreme Court had no legislative powers and, therefore, a delegate of the Supreme Court, i.e. the Committee, cannot be discharging a legislative or quasi-legislative function. As held by the Supreme Court in STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH v. RENUSAGAR POWER COMPANY [AIR 1988 SC 1737], when an authority had power to fix different rates and the function was quasi-legislative in character, the decision in such a case must be arrived at objectively and in consonance with the principles of natural justice. When the power was exercised with reference to a class, it would be in the nature of subordinate legislation, but when the power was exercised with reference to individual, it would be administrative.
Supreme Court of India Cites 56 - Cited by 351 - S Mukharji - Full Document

State Of U.P. & Ors.Etc vs Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samiti & Ors. Etc on 24 March, 1995

11.3 Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in STATE OF U.P. v. PRADHAN SANGH KSHETTRA SAMITI [AIR 1995 SC 1512], it was also submitted that there could be, in the matters which are very urgent, even a post-decisional hearing in compliance of the principles of natural justice, but there is nothing like post-decisional reasoning to be supplied by affidavits filed afterwards. Thus, without derogating from the first submission that the impugned decision of the Committee was quasi-judicial, it was submitted that even if it were purely administrative or quasi-legislative in nature, the recording and supplying of reasons was indispensable whereas the Committee had, at best, only indicated the table of fees prescribed for a number of colleges in the form of "Fee Committee Report" (annexed as Annexure-D to the affidavit-in-reply on behalf of respondent No. 1 at page 271 of the paper-book in LPA No. 1380 of 2004).
Supreme Court of India Cites 56 - Cited by 558 - P B Sawant - Full Document

Islamic Academy Of Education And ... vs State Of Karnataka And Others on 14 August, 2003

6. Assailing the fee structure prescribed by the respondent Committee and the impugned judgment, learned senior advocate Mr. S.B. Vakil, appearing for the appellants submitted, in substance, that the Committee was not set up by the State Government, and the Committee had not fixed the fee structure, strictly in accordance with the directions of the Apex Court in ISLAMIC ACADEMY (supra). That obviously many non-members were active and participating in the proceedings of the Committee. That the Committee was discharging a quasi-judicial function and in absence of a reasoned order fixing the fee structure in various educational institutions, the fixation was bad in law and non est. That reasons, if any, cannot be supplied subsequently by filing affidavits. That the fee structure prescribed by the Committee violated the fundamental right of the educational institutions as guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution and petition under Article 226 was the proper remedy therefor. That there was no suppression of material facts regarding the orders in earlier proceedings and the undertaking filed by the appellants.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 335 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next