TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether a notification issued under section 7(1) of the Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1950, specially empowering specified officers to make complaints, amounts to law so as to attract judicial notice under section 57(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. (ii) Whether the earlier view that a statutory notification cannot amount to law was correctly decided.
Issue (i): Whether a notification issued under section 7(1) of the Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1950, specially empowering specified officers to make complaints, amounts to law so as to attract judicial notice under section 57(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Analysis: The statutory scheme showed that the notification was issued in exercise of delegated legislative power and operated with the section itself to regulate cognizance of offences. The judgment distinguished legislative instruments from purely executive orders and held that rules, regulations, orders and notifications issued under statutory authority are law when they add to, supplement, modify or exempt from the operation of the parent statute. Support was drawn from constitutional definitions of law and existing law, and from authorities treating legislative notifications as having the force of law.
Conclusion: The notification amounted to law and judicial notice had to be taken of it under section 57(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Issue (ii): Whether the earlier view that a statutory notification cannot amount to law was correctly decided.
Analysis: The earlier decision failed to distinguish between statutory and non-statutory notifications. A price-fixing notification under delegated power, like other legislative notifications, supplements the parent enactment and has the force of law. The reasoning in the earlier case was therefore inconsistent with the constitutional and statutory understanding of delegated legislation.
Conclusion: The earlier view was wrongly decided.
Final Conclusion: The reference was answered in favour of the appellant, and the notification was held to be part of the law governing cognizance of offences under the Act. The matter was directed to proceed before the Division Bench for final disposal.
Ratio Decidendi: A statutory notification issued under delegated legislative authority, which supplements or modifies the parent statute, has the force of law and is capable of judicial notice under section 57(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
TaxTMI 
