https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108440 Informal proceedings and a follow-up letter from an inter-departmental meeting were not binding directions of the State Government under section 39 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, because they amounted only to suggestions and a proposal for Board consideration. The Corporation's Board independently decided not to extend the interest benefit for the earlier period, and that policy decision remained the Corporation's own. A writ of mandamus could not issue because no enforceable legal right or corresponding statutory duty was shown, and the financial policy choice was not subject to light interference under Article 226. en-us Tue, 25 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:17:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108440 Informal proceedings and a follow-up letter from an inter-departmental meeting were not binding directions of the State Government under section 39 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, because they amounted only to suggestions and a proposal for Board consideration. The Corporation's Board independently decided not to extend the interest benefit for the earlier period, and that policy decision remained the Corporation's own. A writ of mandamus could not issue because no enforceable legal right or corresponding statutory duty was shown, and the financial policy choice was not subject to light interference under Article 226. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 25 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108440