https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168288 The SC states that disputed facts do not bar writ jurisdiction under Article 226, because the choice to decline complex factual enquiry is a matter of judicial discretion, not absence of jurisdiction. It further holds that an administrative order refixing a government servant's date of birth and causing premature retirement cannot stand unless the person is given notice, disclosure of the material relied on, and a fair opportunity to respond. An order affecting service rights and civil consequences is invalid where natural justice is denied, and the resulting retirement decision was therefore set aside. en-us Tue, 07 Feb 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Feb 2015 12:20:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168288 The SC states that disputed facts do not bar writ jurisdiction under Article 226, because the choice to decline complex factual enquiry is a matter of judicial discretion, not absence of jurisdiction. It further holds that an administrative order refixing a government servant's date of birth and causing premature retirement cannot stand unless the person is given notice, disclosure of the material relied on, and a fair opportunity to respond. An order affecting service rights and civil consequences is invalid where natural justice is denied, and the resulting retirement decision was therefore set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 07 Feb 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168288