id stringlengths 14 16 | Titles stringlengths 37 96 | text stringlengths 5 2.68k | source stringlengths 34 39 |
|---|---|---|---|
a5ef268abef8-23 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | Development Authority v. Ajai Pal Singh MANU/SC/0058/1989: [1989]1SCR743; Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Escorts Ltd. MANU/SC/0015/1985 : 1986(8)ECC189 ; and Kulchinder Singh and Ors. v. Hardayal Singh Brar and Ors. MANU/SC/0507/1976: | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-24 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | (1976)IILLJ204SC. | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-25 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 40. Before proceeding further, what may be noted is that a writ of mandamus is a public remedy and this remedy lies, when a public authority fails to perform the duty entrusted to it by law. In other words, a writ of mandamus is issued against a person, who has a legal duty to perform, but has failed or neglected to do... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-26 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 41. What, now, needs to be noted is that howsoever thin and subtle may be, there is, indeed, a real and definite line of demarcation not only between a public wrong and a private wrong, but also between a public law remedy and private law remedy. Article 226 is pre-eminently a public law remedy and is not, generally, a... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-27 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | "29. Thus, it can be seen that a writ of mandamus or the remedy under Article 226 is pre- eminently a public law remedy and is not generally available as a remedy against private wrongs. It is used for enforcement of various rights of the public or to compel public/statutory authorities to discharge their duties and to... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-28 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | If the private body is discharging a public function and the denial of any right is in connection with the public duty imposed on such body, the public law remedy can be enforced. The duty cast on the public body may be either statutory or otherwise and the source of such power is immaterial, but, nevertheless, there m... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-29 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 43. What also needs to be cautiously noted is that a constitutional or statutory duty is a public duty and enforceable by a writ of mandamus. To put it differently, the rights and duties go hand-in-hand. When a right is given to a person by a State, the State casts upon itself a duty to enforce such a right. Logically,... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-30 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 44. The writ petition, which has given rise to the present appeal, essentially raises a demand for payment of dues and seeks <span class="hidden_text" id="span_51"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> a writ, in the nature of mandamus, forcing the State to pay its dues. Apart from the fact that... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-31 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 45. However, the principle that in an appropriate case, writ jurisdiction can be invoked even to enforce a contractual obligation of the State or its instrumentality was made clear by the Supreme Court, in K.N. Guruswamy v. State of Mysore MANU/SC/0006/1954: [1955]1 SCR 305, wherein the Supreme <span class="hidden_text... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-32 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 46. Close on the heels of the decision of the Supreme Court in K.N. Guruswamy (supra) is the decision, in DFO, South Kheri v. Ram Sanehi Singh, reported in MANU/SC/0450/1970: AIR 1973 SC 205. This was a case in which it was contended, on behalf of the appellant, before the Supreme Court, that since the dispute arose ou... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-33 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | "We are unable to hold, that merely because the source of the right which the respondent claims was initially in a contract, for obtaining relief against any arbitrary and unlawful action on the part of a public authority he must resort to a suit and not to a petition by way of a writ. In view of the judgment of this C... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-34 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 48. In fact, it was made clear by the Supreme Court, speaking through Krishna Iyer, J. in Kulchinder Singh and Ors.
v. Hardayal Singh Brar and Ors.
MANU/SC/0507/1976:(1976)IILLJ 204 SC, that writ
jurisdiction cannot be invoke... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-35 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 49. I may, now, refer to the case of Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Escorts Ltd. (supra), wherein a Constitution Bench held that though the field of constitutional law, administrative law and public law has forged ahead of the law in England, uninhibited by the technical rules, which have hampered the developme... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-36 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | Supreme Court, in Escorts Ltd.(supra), that it is impossible to draw the line, with precision, between the frontiers of the public law domain and the private law field and that the question must be decided, in each case, with reference to the particular action, the activity in which the State or the instrumentality of ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-37 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | The relevant observations made, in this regard, in Escorts Ltd. (supra), read as follows: | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-38 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 101. It was, however, urged by the <span class="hidden_text" id="span_63"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> learned Counsel for the company that the Life Insurance Corporation was an instrumentality of the State and was, therefore, debarred by Article 14 from acting arbitrarily. It was, ther... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-39 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | [1977]3SCR249. While we do find considerable force in the contention of the learned Attorney General it may not be necessary for us to enter into any lengthy <span class="hidden_text" id="span_65"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> discussion of the topic, as we shall presently see. We also d... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-40 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 102. For example, if the action of the State is political or sovereign in character, the court will keep away from it. The court will not debate academic matters or concern itself with the intricacies of trade and commerce. If the action of the State is related to contractual obligations or obligations arising out of t... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-41 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 50. From the above observations made in Escorts <span class="hidden_text" id="span_69"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> Ltd. (supra) it becomes clear that though Article 14 cannot be used as a charter for judicial review of all actions of the State and that every action of the State in cont... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-42 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 51. Closely following the decision of the Constitution Bench, in Escorts Ltd. (supra), is the case of Dwarkadas Marfatia and Sons v. Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay reported in MANU/SC/0330/1989 : | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-43 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | [1989]2SCR751. In this case, the appellant, M/s. Dwarkadas & <span class="hidden_text" id="span_71"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> Sons, had been a tenant on a portion of a land of the respondent Corporation, namely, Bombay Port Trust, for over 40 years, Bombay Port Trust having been cons... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-44 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 52. In its decision, in Dwarkadas Marfatia and Sons (supra), a Three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court, having taken note of Rampratap Jaydayal v. Dominion of India reported in MANU/MH/0096/1953: AIR 1953 Bom 170 and Escorts Ltd. (supra), held that though the field of letting and eviction of tenants is, normally, govern... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-45 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 53. The Apex Court further made it clear, in Dwarkadas Marfatia (supra), that every action/activity of the trust, which is a State within the meaning of Article 12, must be subject to Article 14 and must be reasonable and taken only upon lawful and relevant grounds of public interest and whenever there is arbitrariness... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-46 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | Reliance was also placed on the observations of this Court in Life Insurance <span class="hidden_text" id="span_77"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> Corporation of India v. Escorts Ltd. and Ors. 1985 Suppl. (3) SCR 909 in support of the contention that the public corporations' dealing with ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-47 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 23. The contractual privileges are made immune from the protection of the Rent Act for the respondent because of the public position occupied by the respondent authority. Hence, its actions are amenable to judicial review only to the extent that the State must act validly for a discernible <span class="hidden_text" id=... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-48 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 24. The field of letting and eviction of tenants is normally governed by the Rent Act. The port trust is statutorily exempted from the operation of Rent Act on the basis of its public/government character. The legislative assumption or expectation as noted in the observations of Chagla, CJ in Rampratap Jaidayal's case ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-49 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 25. Therefore, Mr. Chinai was right in contending that every action/ activity of the Bombay Port Trust which constituted "State" within Article 12 of the Constitution in respect of any right conferred or privilege granted by any statute is subject to Article 14 and must be reasonable and taken only upon lawful and rele... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-50 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 27. We are inclined to accept the submission that every activity of a public authority, especially in the background of the assumption on which such authority enjoys immunity from the rigours of the Rent Act, must be informed by reason and guided by the public interest. All exercise of discretion or power by public aut... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-51 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 55. What is also necessary to note, in the case of Dwarkadas Marfatia(supra), is that this was a case, where the relationship between the parties to the dispute, being that of landlord and tenant, was essentially contractual in nature, yet the Supreme Court held that such a dispute is not wholly outside the purview of ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-52 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 56. If the decision in Dwarkadas Marfatia(supra), is carefully read, it becomes more than abundantly clear that <span class="hidden_text" id="span_87"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> though at the first blush, the decision in Radhakrishna Agarwal (supra), appears to have laid down that the... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-53 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 57. What emerges from the above discussion is that when a writ petition is filed alleging breach of contractual obligation by the State or its instrumentality, the High Court shall determine whether the writ petitioner is merely demanding to enforce his contractual rights or he has raised some important questions of la... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-54 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | "10. Article 226 of the Constitution confers extraordinary jurisdiction on the High Court to issue high prerogative writs for enforcement of the fundamental rights or for any other purpose. It is wide and expansive. The Constitution does not place any fetter on exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction. It is left to ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-55 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | the dispute raised, it is necessary to inquire into the facts for determination of which it may become necessary to record oral evidence, a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution is not the appropriate forum. The position is also well settled that if the contract entered between the parties provides an altern... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-56 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | v. Raja Mahendra Pal MANU/SC/0227/1999 : [1999]2SCR323 . | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-57 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 11. The position that emerges from the discussions in the decided cases is that ordinarily the High Court should not entertain a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution for mere enforcement of a claim under a contract of insurance. Where an insurer has repudiated the claim, in case such a writ petitio... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-58 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 58. Moreover, when a writ court finds that the refusal to extend constitutional remedy of Article 226 to enforce a contractual right or obligation would drive a person, knocking at the doors of a writ court, to a long drawn litigation in the civil court causing serious prejudice to the person seeking relief <span class... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-59 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | "The pros and cons of the matter in the context of the fact situation of the case should be carefully weighed and appropriate decision should be taken." | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-60 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 59. From the law, as laid down in Asha Goel (supra), it becomes transparent that when non-interference by a writ court would drive a person to a long drawn civil litigation causing serious prejudice to him, the writ court's interference is not only desirable, but even necessary. As a corollary to this proposition of la... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-61 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 60. From the decision in Asha Goel (supra), what emerges is that ordinarily, a High Court should not entertain a writ petition, under Article 226, for mere enforcement of claims under a contract of insurance; however, the Constitution having not placed any fetters on the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction by the Hi... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-62 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | entertain writ petitions for enforcement of purely contractual rights and obligations, <span class="hidden_text" id="span_105"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> particularly, when determination of such questions necessitates taking of oral evidence or when the parties had agreed to resolve t... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-63 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 61. We, now, turn to the case of Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors., reported in MANU/SC/0504/1991: AIR 1991 SC 537. While considering the case of Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi (supra), what may be borne in mind is that it was a case in which the Government of Uttar Pradesh terminated, with the ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-64 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | the constitutional scheme to accept the argument of exclusion of Article 14 in contractual matters. The court, however, hastened to add that the scope and grounds on which judicial review would be permissible in contractual matters may be a different matter, but contractual matters cannot be wholly excluded from the pu... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-65 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 14. To this extent, reiterated the court, in Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi (supra), the obligation of a State is of a public character and that contractual obligation cannot divest the person aggrieved of the guarantee under Article 14 of non- arbitrariness at the hands of the State in all its actions. | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-66 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 62. Symbolizing the nature of character of the State, when it enters into contractual relationships, the Supreme Court made it clear in Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi (supra) that the State cannot be attributed the split personality of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in the contractual field so as to impress on it all the characte... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-67 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 63. In Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi (supra), the court also took the view that even assuming that it is necessary to import the concept of presence of some public element in a State action, in the realm of contractual obligations, to attract Article 14, the fact remains that the ultimate impact of all actions of the Stat... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-68 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | "21. The Preamble of the Constitution of India resolves to secure, to all its citizens, justice, social, economic and political and equality of status and opportunity. Every State action must be aimed at achieving this goal. Part IV of the Constitution contains 'Directive Principles of State Policy' which are fundament... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-69 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 22. There is an obvious difference in the contracts between private parties and contracts to which the State is a party. Private parties are concerned only with their personal interest whereas the State while exercising its powers and discharging its functions acts indubitably, as is expected of <span class="hidden_tex... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-70 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 23. Thus, in a case like the present, if it is shown that the impugned State action is arbitrary and, therefore, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, there can be no impediment in striking down the impugned act irrespective of the question whether an additional right, contractual or statutory, if any, is also a... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-71 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 24. The State cannot be attributed the split personality of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in the contractual field so as to impress on it all the characteristics of the State at the threshold while making a contract requiring it to fulfil the obligation of Article 14 of the Constitution and thereafter permitting it to cast o... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-72 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 28. Even assuming that it is necessary to import the concept of presence of some public element in a State action to attract Article 14 and permit judicial review, we have no hesitation in saying that the ultimate impact of all actions of the State or a public body being undoubtedly on public interest, the requisite pu... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-73 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 29. It can no longer be doubted at this point of time that Article 14 of the Constitution of India applies also to matters of governmental policy and if the policy or any action of the government, even in contractual matters, fails to satisfy the test of reasonableness, it would be unconstitutional. See Ramana Dayaram ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-74 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 30. In Divarkadas Marfatia and Sons v. Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay MANU/SC/0330/1989 : [1989]2SCR751 , the matter was re-examined in relation to an instrumentality of the State for applicability of Article 14 to all its actions. Referring to the earlier decisions of this Court and examining the argument for... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-75 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | act otherwise in any field of its activity, irrespective of the nature of its functions when it has the uppermost duty to be governed by the rule of law. Non- arbitrariness, in substance, is only fair play in action. We have no doubt that this obvious requirement must be satisfied by every action of the State or its in... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-76 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 33. No doubt, it is true, as indicated by us earlier, that there is a presumption of validity of the State action and the burden is on the person who alleges violation of Article 14 to prove the assertion. However, where no plausible reason or principle is indicated nor is it discernible and the impugned State action, ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-77 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 64. What emerges from the observations, made in Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi (supra),is that even after having <span class="hidden_text" id="span_131"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> entered into a contract, the State cannot act arbitrarily, unreasonably or unfairly merely because of the fac... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-78 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 65. Yet another decision is the case of ABL International Ltd. v. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd., reported in MANU/SC/1080/2003: (2004) 3 SCC 553. In this case, the fourth respondent entered into a contract with a State owned corporation of Kazaksthan on 26.08.1993. As per the original agreement, pay... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-79 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | of the Government of Kazaksthan to fulfil its guarantee, the appellants made a claim on the first contract of payment without first consulting it and it had, therefore, no obligation to compensate the appellants for the loss suffered by it. Having failed to make the first respondent adhere to the contract of insurance,... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-80 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | "7. Ms. Indira Jaising, learned senior <span class="hidden_text" id="span_135"> Patna High Court LPA No.2 of 2014 (10) dt. 15-05-2014</span> Counsel appearing for the first respondent, submitted that on facts and circumstances of this case, a writ petition was not maintainable nor can it be construed as an appropriate ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-81 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 66. Having noted the above submissions made on behalf of the respondents, the Supreme Court held that one of the questions that falls for consideration is whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable to enforce a contractual obligation of the State or its instrumentality. | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-82 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 67. Responding to the question posed above, the Supreme Court has held in ABL International Ltd. (supra), that the question as to whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable to enforce a contractual obligation of the State is no more res integra. Points out the court in ABL International Ltd. (supra), tha... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-83 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 68. Having taken note of the case of Ram Sanehi Singh (supra), which followed K.N. Guruswamy (supra), and also Gujarat State Financial Corporation v. Lotus Hotels Pvt. Ltd. reported in MANU/SC/0036/1983 : AIR 1983 SC 848 , which followed Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India reported in MANU... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-84 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | (b) Merely because some disputed questions of facts arise for consideration, same cannot be a ground to refuse to entertain a writ petition in all cases as a matter of rule.
(c) A writ petition involving a consequential relief of monetary claim is also maintainable."
70. From what has been culled out above, there r... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-85 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | "53. From the above, it is clear that when an instrumentality of the State acts contrary to public good and public interest, unfairly, unjustly and unreasonably, in its contractual, constitutional or statutory obligations, it really acts contrary to the constitutional guarantee found in Article 14 of the Constitution. ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-86 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | (Emphasis supplied)
72. From the above observations made in para 53, what emerges is that when the State or its instrumentality acts contrary to public good, public interest, unfairly, unjustly and unreasonably in the realm of its contractual obligations, arising out of even non-statutory contract, it really acts con... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
a5ef268abef8-87 | Md. Nizamuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 May, 2014 | 74. Having decided the applicability of the law, we direct that the petitioner-appellant's dues shall be calculated in accordance with law, as has been decided above, and the payment shall be made to the petitioner-appellant by the respondents within a period of three months from today.
75. In the result, and for th... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173691638/ |
0eea247304c0-0 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO.8317 OF 2009
======================================================
M/S ADITYA BIRLA TELECOM LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ADITYA BIRLA CENTRE, A-WING, 4TH FLOOR,... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-1 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, ROAD DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, SAMASTIPUR
6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PATNA CITY ROAD DIVISION, GULZARBAGH, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, PATNA
7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION, GAYA .... .... RESPONDENT/S =================================... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-2 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 3. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF - CUM - ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER - CUM - ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, SECRETARIAT, PATNA
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NEW CAPITAL DIVISION, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA
5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-3 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 2. THE JOINT SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, SECRETARIAT, PATNA
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PATNA CITY ROAD DIVISION, GULZARBAGH, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, PATNA
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD DIVISION, DEHRI-ON-SONE, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, DEHRI-ON-SONE
5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGI... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-4 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 2. VODAFONE ESSAR SOUTH LIMITED, A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY DULY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT C-48, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-II, NEW DELHI-110020 AND ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR, MAHARAJA KAMESHWAR COMPLEX, FRASER ROAD, PATNA-800001 BOTH ARE DULY REPR... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-5 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 1. VODAFONE ESSAR SPACETEL LIMITED, A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY DULY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT C-48, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-II, NEW DELHI-110020 AND ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR, MAHARAJA KAMESHWAR COMPLEX, FRASER ROAD, PATNA-800001 4 / 21 | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-6 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 2. VODAFONE ESSAR SOUTH LIMITED, A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY DULY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT C-48, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-II, NEW DELHI-110020 AND ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR, MAHARAJA KAMESHWAR COMPLEX, FRASER ROAD, PATNA-800001 BOTH ARE DULY REPR... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-7 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 7. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NAGAR PARISHAD, BUXAR .... .... RESPONDENT/S ====================================================== Appearance :
(In CWJC No.8317 of 2009) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y. V. Giri, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Advocate Mr. Ashish Giri, Advocate Mr. Akash Chaturvedi, Advocate For the Re... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-8 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Advocate Mr. Nilanjan Chatterjee, Advocate Mr. Raghwendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. P. K. Verma, AAG V Mr. S. R. Saran, AC to AAG V ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN CAV ORDER 14 21-03-2013 These batch o... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-9 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 5,000/- per kilometer per year as land usage charges for allowing the petitioners to lay underground optical fibre cables on the lands belonging to the State Government.
The Government of India formulated a new telecom policy in the year 1994 aimed at giving highest priority to the development of telecom services in... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-10 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | Initially, when permission was granted to the petitioners‟ companies to lay down the optical fibre cables, a resolution was passed on 11.07.2005 vide memo no. 4564(S) me, giving certain directions to the companies which were utilizing the right of way on the lands which belong to the Road Construction Department. Layin... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-11 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | In pursuance of the aforesaid permission, a resolution was taken by the State Government issued vide letter no. 4501(S) dated 28.03.2008, wherein the State Government has stated that since the telecom companies have developed, grown and established themselves as business enterprises, they no longer come under the categ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-12 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | All these issues have been amalgamated in the judgment.
I shall begin with the power of the State Government to demand Land Usage Charge for utilization of its land by companies/individuals. It has been argued that the Union Government has the power to enact laws with respect to Post and Telegraph; telephones, wirel... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-13 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | At the outset, it is quite obvious and requires no citation of any case to point out that the State Government has not made any law or granted any license under the topics covered by Entry 31 in the 7th Schedule of the Union List, rather if at all, it would come under Entry 18 of the State List, which reads as "Land, t... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-14 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | In the case of Associated Hotels Of India Ltd vs R. N. Kapoor [AIR 1959 SUPREME COURT 1262], the Supreme Court has distinguish between a license and a fee. One R. N. Kapoor filed an application before the Rent Controller, New Delhi, alleging that he was a tenant of the spaces in the cloak rooms under the Hotel (appella... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-15 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | Section 105 of the Transfer of Property Act 12 / 21 defines a lease of immovable properties as transfer of a right to enjoy such property made for a certain time in consideration for a price paid or promised. Under Section 108, the licensee is entitled to be put in possession of the property, a lease is, therefore, a t... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-16 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | Thus, in the present case, it cannot be said that the State Government had granted a license to the Petitioners‟ Companies nor can it be lawfully said that they had leased the properties as the Companies did not come into exclusive possession over the lands that were utilized or are to be utilized by them. | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-17 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | Another judgment which would be relevant for the purposes of explaining what is a tax or fee is the case of Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras vs. Lakshmindra ThirthSwamiar, [AIR 1954 SC 282]. The facts of this case are not very relevant for the purposes of the present dispute. The power of the State Gove... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-18 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | the other hand, is generally defined to be a charge for a special service rendered to individuals by some governmental agency. The amount of fee levied is supposed to be based on the expenses incurred by the Government in rendering the service. The distinction between a tax and a fee, lies primarily in the fact that a ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-19 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | Counsel also refers to the judgment of Gupta Modern Breweries vs. State of J &K and Others [(2007) 6 SCC 15 / 21 317]. The Excise Commissioner under rule 17 of the Jammu & Kashmir Distillery Rule sought to impose charges on account of salary of Excise Department staff which were to be recovered from the management to t... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-20 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | The decision cited by the Counsel for the Petitioners‟ Companies, which I may merely mention in passing would not be applicable in the facts of this case as they deal with the imposition of tax and fees, are, Consumer Online Foundation and Others vs. Union of India and Others [(2011) 5 SCC 360], Commissioner of Income ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-21 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | issues raised by the petitioners in these cases. The findings of the Apex Court that only the Central Government and no other has a right to carry telecommunication activities cannot be doubted. In the present cases, the licenses have been granted by the Central Government. The State Government is not taking 17 / 21 an... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-22 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | It is next argued that there is no statutory law under which the term "Land Usage" would be included. It is submitted that even if it is argued that the State is the landlord and it is charging rent, then it should be under the provisions of the law laid down under which the State can demand a rent. An attempt has been... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-23 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | that matter a proprietor may charge for the land. It may be noted that the Bihar Tenancy Act refers to the right of the raiyat as well as the under-raiyat of land and the State Government charges a rent under the Act from the tenant or an under-raiyat for occupation of the land. In the present case, the provision of th... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-24 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 19 / 21 There is no dispute about the fact that the State Government or the agencies under it are the owners or in other words the landlords and anyone seeking to derive any benefit from the lands owned by the State Government must pay under the general law. The demand is raised depending on the purpose for which the l... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
0eea247304c0-25 | Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.&A vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 21 March, 2013 | 20 / 21 Simply put „rent‟ is compensation for the use of land. In this particular case, the Government has taken a policy decision to impose rent which is charged for use of street by Telegraph Companies. The term „rental‟ is properly applied to the charge imposed by a city (in this case the Government) on a telegraph ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198757445/ |
8c79d10f2daa-0 | Phuljharia Devi & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 September, 2009 | IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.3483 of 2007
1. Phuljharia Devi, w/o Late Munka Rai.
2. Bhola Rai, S/o Late Munka Rai.
Both resident of Mohalla-Paharpur, P.S.-
Gardanibagh, Town and district-Patna.
... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49275886/ |
8c79d10f2daa-1 | Phuljharia Devi & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 September, 2009 | "A writ of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ or order or
direction be issued commanding the
respondent authorities to pay to the petitioner the balance of due compensation fo... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49275886/ |
8c79d10f2daa-2 | Phuljharia Devi & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 September, 2009 | It is the case of the petitioners, as projected with full sincerity by Mr. Anurag Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners, that the piece of land belonging to the husband of petitioner no.1 was acquired way back by the State of Bihar for the benefit of Police Employees House Construction Society (hereinafter ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49275886/ |
8c79d10f2daa-3 | Phuljharia Devi & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 September, 2009 | It is the case of the petitioner no.1 that in terms of the judgment of this Court as affirmed by the Apex Court she was entitled for payment of Rs. 4,45,161.16 paise (principal amount Rs. 1,17,069.81 paise and interest as on 3.4.2000 Rs. 3,28,091.35 paise), but on an impression created by the Society, respondent no.3, ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49275886/ |
8c79d10f2daa-4 | Phuljharia Devi & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 September, 2009 | In this case two separate counter affidavits have been filed, one by respondent no.1 the State of Bihar and the other by the Society, respondent no.3. From the reading of the counter affidavit of the State it would appear that a preliminary objection has been taken that since the petitioners had in terms of the agreeme... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49275886/ |
8c79d10f2daa-5 | Phuljharia Devi & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 September, 2009 | The respective stands in the pleadings of the parties, therefore, lead to the first and foremost question as to whether this writ petition for payment of amount of award under the Act after disposal of execution case in the Court below is maintainable?
Since the plea of alternative remedy was raised by the responden... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49275886/ |
8c79d10f2daa-6 | Phuljharia Devi & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 September, 2009 | 226. In this context reliance was placed by him on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Swetamber Sthanakwasi Jain Samiti vs. Alleged Committee of Management Sri R.J.I. College, Ara, reported in (1996) 3 SCC 11 and the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sachidanand Roy & ors. vs. the State of... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49275886/ |
8c79d10f2daa-7 | Phuljharia Devi & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 September, 2009 | Rebutting the aforementioned submissions of the learned AAG III Mr. Shukla has submitted that the payment of award being part of a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 31 of the Constitution as was available in the year 1977-78 in view of acquisition of the land made in that period, there would be no waiver of fu... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49275886/ |
8c79d10f2daa-8 | Phuljharia Devi & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 September, 2009 | In the opinion of this Court the preliminary objection raised by the Respondents as pressed by the learned Addl. Advocate General No. III must be upheld that the present writ application seeking enforcement of an award under the Act is not maintainable. The reasons for the same are quite simple. As noted above, in the ... | https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49275886/ |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.