TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕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%
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: Whether the resignation of the Chairman of the Himachal Pradesh Khadi and Village Industries Board became effective on the date it was communicated, without acceptance by the Government, and whether the candidate had ceased to hold an office of profit on the date fixed for scrutiny of nominations.
Analysis: The statutory scheme distinguished between resignation from membership of the Board and resignation from the office of Chairman. For a member, the Act required notice to the Government and notification in the Official Gazette; for the Chairman, no corresponding requirement of acceptance or gazette notification was provided. The office of Chairman, being held by nomination from among members, could be relinquished by a unilateral act communicated to the competent departmental authority. The resignation letter expressly sought to resign with immediate effect, and once received by the head of the department dealing with the Board, it operated from that date. Since the candidate had ceased to be Chairman before the date of scrutiny, he was not holding an office of profit on that date. The second question regarding cessation of the office of profit after withdrawal of remuneration was not examined further because it was unnecessary for disposal.
Conclusion: The resignation took effect on 31 January 1990 without formal acceptance, and the candidate did not hold an office of profit on 5 February 1990; the rejection of his nomination was improper.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
