Mandamus - duty

Mehsana DCCB v. State, AIR 2004 SC 1576 (mandamus lies when breach of statute is shown);
Indian Bank (AIR 2008 SC 2585) (court can order inquiry into affairs of coop banks when breach of statute and act to the prejudice of depositors is shown)
Sent from phone

Heirs of deceased employee can claim benefits of service - retiral dues

   

AIR 1996 SC 571

AIR 1969 All 432

AIR 2009 SC 3162

Opinion of Attorney General cannot be sought by CBI

(2007) 1 SCC 110

AIR 2007 SC 1087

Scope of Article 227

a.       In Jai Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, (2010) 9 SCC 385, the Hon'ble Apex Court while dealing with the scope of Article 227  observed in paragraph 15 that "Undoubtedly, the High Court under this Article, has the jurisdiction to ensure that all subordinate courts as well as statutory or quasi-judicial tribunals, exercise the powers vested in them, within the bounds of their authority."

 

b.      In Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Patil,  (2010) 8 SCC 329 at page 346 para 47, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that "… in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227, the High Court, apart from annulling the proceedings, can also substitute the impugned order by the order which the inferior tribunal should have made." (but see para 49( c) and 66, also but see para 58).

 

c.    Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai & Others, (2003) 6 SCC 675 (Paras 6-21)

Heirs of deceased employee can claim benefits of service

AIR 1996 SC 571

AIR 1969 All 432

Investigation by CBI shall not take place on basis of audit report.

 

115(2004)DLT297, 2005(79)DRJ24

"Investigation by CBI shall not take place on basis of audit report."

Compulsory Registration of Leases Section 17(1)(b) of Registration Act

AIR 1997 All 396 (Full Bench), para 9

 

Gyasi Ram v. Ram Chandra MANU/UP/0090/1978 : AIR 1978 All 376, that the requirement of registration contained in Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act cannot be circumvented or allowed to be defeated by setting up a case of permanent tenancy on the basis of oral evidence.

 

Zarif Ahmad v. Satish Kumar, 1982 AWC907

 

AIR 2000 3523

 

AIR 1964 SC 358

 

TEST

 

Invocation of Urgency Clause in Land Acquisition - Colourable Exercise - Part VII Land Acquisition

Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority vs. Devendra Kumar reported in 2011 (6) ADJ 480

Radhey Shyam v. State of U.P. reported in (2011) 5 Supreme Court Cases 533  

Devender Kumar Tyagi v. State of U.P. (2011) 9 SCC 164, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that urgency clause provided in Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 cannot be lightly invoked, and that there is no justification to invoke urgency in case of proposed development of township in order to do away with the principles of natural justice as embodied in Section 5A of the 1894 Act.

Darshan Lal Nagpal v. Government of NCT of Delhi  Civil Appeal No. 11169 of 2011 decided on 03.01.2012, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has once again categorically held that compulsory acquisition of the property belonging to a private individual is a serious matter and has grave repercussions on his Constitutional right of not being deprived of his property without the sanction of law – Article 300A and the legal rights.

Royal Orchid Hotels Ltd v. G.Jayarama Reddy reported in  (2011) 10 SCC 608   - Colourable exercise of power for land acquisition for corporates

Devinder Singh & Others vs State Of Punjab & Others on 12 October, 2007  Appeal (civil) 4843 of 2007 (reported 2008 SCC)

 

 

One must approach the authorities prior to approaching court for mandamus

AIR 1976 SC 1654 para 42
Sent from phone