https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97078 The article addresses whether a statutory proviso permitting the executive to notify that District Courts exercise Companies Act jurisdiction amounts to unlawful delegation. It reasons that the legislature made the core policy choice to vest District Courts with jurisdiction and the proviso merely empowers the executive to specify timing and scope by notification. Because the delegation is confined to implementing an already-determined legislative policy, it is not an impermissible transfer of primary legislative power; the District Court's jurisdiction to hear the winding-up petition is therefore sustained and the challenge to that jurisdiction is rejected. en-us Wed, 18 Oct 1950 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jan 2012 18:43:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97078 The article addresses whether a statutory proviso permitting the executive to notify that District Courts exercise Companies Act jurisdiction amounts to unlawful delegation. It reasons that the legislature made the core policy choice to vest District Courts with jurisdiction and the proviso merely empowers the executive to specify timing and scope by notification. Because the delegation is confined to implementing an already-determined legislative policy, it is not an impermissible transfer of primary legislative power; the District Court's jurisdiction to hear the winding-up petition is therefore sustained and the challenge to that jurisdiction is rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 18 Oct 1950 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97078