https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106714 A writ petition under Article 226 challenging SEBI proceedings, including the appointment of an enquiry officer, enquiry notices, the report and a show-cause notice, was held not fit for interference at that stage. The court treated the complaint of non-compliance with Regulation 13 of the FUTP Regulations as, at most, an irregularity or erroneous exercise of power, not a total absence of jurisdiction, especially since the petitioners had participated in the proceedings and had efficacious statutory remedies by appeal to the SAT under Section 15T and a further appeal under Section 15Z. en-us Thu, 11 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:14:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106714 A writ petition under Article 226 challenging SEBI proceedings, including the appointment of an enquiry officer, enquiry notices, the report and a show-cause notice, was held not fit for interference at that stage. The court treated the complaint of non-compliance with Regulation 13 of the FUTP Regulations as, at most, an irregularity or erroneous exercise of power, not a total absence of jurisdiction, especially since the petitioners had participated in the proceedings and had efficacious statutory remedies by appeal to the SAT under Section 15T and a further appeal under Section 15Z. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 11 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106714