https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168174 The power to appoint a manager under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 carried by necessary implication the power to suspend or remove the appointee, and the validity of the removal depended on its substance rather than its description. The Deputy Custodian's order was therefore within competence and lawful. Separately, a writ of mandamus under Article 226 could not be used to enforce an alleged allotment where the correspondence showed only a decision in principle and no concluded allotment or statutory duty. The claim for possession or allotment accordingly failed, and no writ relief was available. en-us Tue, 04 May 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Jan 2015 13:02:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168174 The power to appoint a manager under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 carried by necessary implication the power to suspend or remove the appointee, and the validity of the removal depended on its substance rather than its description. The Deputy Custodian's order was therefore within competence and lawful. Separately, a writ of mandamus under Article 226 could not be used to enforce an alleged allotment where the correspondence showed only a decision in principle and no concluded allotment or statutory duty. The claim for possession or allotment accordingly failed, and no writ relief was available. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 04 May 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168174