Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the notice issued by the State Electricity Board for purchase of the licensee's undertaking under section 6(1)(a) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, as amended, was valid.
Analysis: The right of the State Electricity Board to purchase the undertaking was a statutory power affecting property rights and therefore had to be exercised strictly in the manner prescribed by the statute. Section 6(1)(a) required a written notice calling upon the licensee to sell the undertaking at the expiry of the relevant period. The impugned notice did not do so; instead, it merely stated that the Board had decided to exercise and would exercise the option of purchase on the expiry date. The notice was also internally inconsistent, referring both to the amended statutory scheme and to the earlier position, so that the licensee could not know with certainty that he was being called upon to sell under the governing law.
Conclusion: The notice was invalid for non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of section 6(1)(a), and the Board could not compel the licensee to sell the undertaking.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute prescribes a specific mode for exercising a power that affects property rights, that mode must be strictly followed and a notice that does not expressly comply with the statutory requirement is invalid.