https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101366 Takeover of a sick industrial undertaking under section 18A was sustained because the order rested on an investigation finding that management was highly detrimental to public interest, and it did not depend on a prior section 16 direction; non-supply of the report caused no shown prejudice. The Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1974 was also upheld as implementing Article 39(b) and therefore protected by Article 31C, defeating challenges under Articles 14 and 19, while the basic structure objection failed as the doctrine applies to constitutional amendments. Vacant land within the mill compound was treated as part of the undertaking and vested in the Central Government. en-us Tue, 09 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Mar 2015 17:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101366 Takeover of a sick industrial undertaking under section 18A was sustained because the order rested on an investigation finding that management was highly detrimental to public interest, and it did not depend on a prior section 16 direction; non-supply of the report caused no shown prejudice. The Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1974 was also upheld as implementing Article 39(b) and therefore protected by Article 31C, defeating challenges under Articles 14 and 19, while the basic structure objection failed as the doctrine applies to constitutional amendments. Vacant land within the mill compound was treated as part of the undertaking and vested in the Central Government. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 09 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101366