Just a moment...
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 Government's order granting exemption to a touring cinema under Rule 14 of the Tamil Nadu Cinemas (Regulations) Rules, 1957 was invalid merely because it did not expressly refer to Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955.
Analysis: The exemption power was traceable to the proviso inserted in Rule 14 by Government Order No. 1326 dated 06-09-1995, and the legality of that amendment had already been upheld. An exercise of statutory power is not vitiated merely because the order does not cite the exact source provision, or refers to a wrong provision, so long as the power actually exists in law and the action can be traced to that source. The omission of an express reference to Section 11 therefore did not justify setting aside the exemption order.
Conclusion: The exemption order was valid and could not be quashed on the ground that Section 11 was not expressly mentioned.
Final Conclusion: The appellate court's interference was unwarranted, and the exemption in favour of the touring cinema stood restored.
Ratio Decidendi: An administrative order is not invalid merely because it omits or misstates the source of power, if the authority in fact possessed the power and the action is otherwise referable to a valid legal provision.