TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court's Jurisdiction Prevails Over Statutory Provisions</h1> <h3>Benedict Denis Kinny Versus Tulip Brian Miranda & Ors. ; Smt. Prachi Prasad Parab Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors.</h3> Benedict Denis Kinny Versus Tulip Brian Miranda & Ors. ; Smt. Prachi Prasad Parab Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. High Court's power to pass interim or final orders affecting statutory provisions.3. Validity of interim orders passed by the High Court in election matters.4. Consequences of non-submission of Caste Validity Certificate within the statutory period.Detailed Analysis:1. Jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India:The core issue was whether the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 is ousted by the statutory scheme of Section 5B of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, which mandates submission of a Caste Validity Certificate within a specified period. The Supreme Court reiterated that the power of judicial review vested in the High Courts under Article 226 and the Supreme Court under Article 32 is an integral and essential feature of the Constitution and constitutes its basic structure. The jurisdiction under Article 226 is original, extraordinary, and discretionary, aimed at remedying injustice and protecting citizens' rights. The Court emphasized that no statutory provision can oust the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226. This principle was supported by precedents such as *Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal Kotah* and *In re The Kerala Education Bill, 1957*.2. High Court's Power to Pass Interim or Final Orders Affecting Statutory Provisions:The Supreme Court addressed whether the High Court had the jurisdiction to pass interim or final orders that interdict the statutory fiction under Section 5B, which deems an election terminated retrospectively if the Caste Validity Certificate is not submitted within the prescribed period. The Court held that the High Court's power to grant interim relief in appropriate cases is not limited by the statutory period prescribed for submitting the certificate. The High Court can pass orders to maintain the status quo to prevent the petition from becoming infructuous, especially when the statutory authority's decision is challenged as illegal. The Court noted that the interim order was issued before the statutory period expired, thus preventing the deeming fiction from coming into operation.3. Validity of Interim Orders Passed by the High Court in Election Matters:The Supreme Court examined whether the interim orders passed by the High Court, which allowed the respondents to continue in their elected positions despite not submitting the Caste Validity Certificate within the statutory period, were valid. The Court upheld the High Court's interim orders, stating that they were in aid of the main relief sought in the writ petitions. The interim orders were necessary to preserve the status quo and prevent the petitions from becoming infructuous. The Court emphasized that the High Court's jurisdiction to issue interim orders cannot be curtailed by statutory provisions.4. Consequences of Non-Submission of Caste Validity Certificate within the Statutory Period:The Supreme Court acknowledged the mandatory nature of the requirement to submit the Caste Validity Certificate within the prescribed period under Section 5B. However, it clarified that the High Court's interim orders, which stayed the consequences of non-submission, prevented the statutory fiction of retrospective termination from coming into effect. The Court noted that the statutory requirement is mandatory, but the High Court's jurisdiction to grant interim relief in appropriate cases remains intact.Conclusion:The Supreme Court concluded that the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 is not ousted by Section 5B of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. The High Court can pass interim and final orders to prevent injustice and maintain the status quo. The interim orders in the present cases were valid and necessary to prevent the writ petitions from becoming infructuous. The appeals were dismissed, and the High Court's judgments were upheld.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
