Special leave petition seeking Article 136 intervention against impugned decision dismissed for lack of manifest error The dominant issue was whether the SC should exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 to interfere with the impugned decision. The Court ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Special leave petition seeking Article 136 intervention against impugned decision dismissed for lack of manifest error
The dominant issue was whether the SC should exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 to interfere with the impugned decision. The Court held that no grounds were made out warranting interference in special leave jurisdiction, indicating an absence of any manifest legal error or miscarriage of justice justifying intervention. Consequently, the Special Leave Petition was dismissed, and any pending application stood disposed of.
The Supreme Court, with Hon'ble Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan presiding, heard the petitioners represented by senior counsel Ms. Nisha Bagchi and others, and the respondents represented by multiple advocates. The Court "condoned delay" but held that "no case for interference is made out in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India." Consequently, the Special Leave Petition was dismissed. The Court clarified that "other remedies of the petitioners for recovery in accordance with law are kept open." Any pending application was also disposed of.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
