Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.22 seconds)Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd., Meerut vs Lakshmichand And Others on 25 September, 1962
9. The nature of judicial function is well settled under our legal
system. Judicial function is the duty to act judicially, which
invests with that character. The distinguishing factor which
separates administrative and judicial function is the duty
and authority to act judicially. Judicial function may thus
be defined as the process of considering the proposal,
5
opposition and then arriving at a decision upon the same on
consideration of facts and circumstances according to the
rules of reason and justice. A Constitution Bench of five
judges in Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd., Meerut vs.
Lakshmichand and Ors., AIR 1963 SC 677, formulated
the following criteria to ascertain whether a decision or an
act is judicial function or not, in the following manner
(1) it is in substance a determination upon
investigation of a question by the application
of objective standards to facts found in the
light of preexisting legal rule;
Section 3 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 147 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 448 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 18A in The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [Entire Act]
Union Of India vs Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Ltd on 23 August, 2007
8. We may note that the aforesaid amendment has been
constitutionally challenged in various writ petitions listed
before a different bench of this Court along with the R.P.
(Crl.) No. 228 of 2018, titled Union of India v. State of
Maharashtra and Others. However, the question before
this Court herein is different, distinct and limited. We are
only concerned with the question whether Registry could
have questioned the maintainability of the Petition.