https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108156 Where connected writ petitions had been stayed pending the Supreme Court's decision on transferred matters, the High Court was bound to dispose of them consistently with that ruling. A later attempt to amend the petitions to raise a different challenge was rejected because it would have undermined the binding effect of the Supreme Court's determination under Article 141, and would have defeated the uniform disposal contemplated by Article 139A. The court held that amendment powers in pending proceedings cannot be used to reopen or circumvent a conclusion already rendered by the Supreme Court. The amendment petitions were therefore rejected, and the writ petitions could not proceed on a basis inconsistent with the earlier decision. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Mar 2012 13:08:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108156 Where connected writ petitions had been stayed pending the Supreme Court's decision on transferred matters, the High Court was bound to dispose of them consistently with that ruling. A later attempt to amend the petitions to raise a different challenge was rejected because it would have undermined the binding effect of the Supreme Court's determination under Article 141, and would have defeated the uniform disposal contemplated by Article 139A. The court held that amendment powers in pending proceedings cannot be used to reopen or circumvent a conclusion already rendered by the Supreme Court. The amendment petitions were therefore rejected, and the writ petitions could not proceed on a basis inconsistent with the earlier decision. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108156