Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
Maintainability of petition before HC - High Court has rejected the contention on alternate remedy because Respondent No.2 (Adjudicating authority) has not even examined the merits of the case when there was a binding order of CESTAT - On facts, the High Court was right in exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, notwithstanding the availability of statutory remedy. - SC