https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168350 An accrued bonus entitlement recognised by a final writ of mandamus was not displaced merely because later legislation altered the underlying settlement; the statute neither referred to the judgment nor contained a non obstante clause directed to judicial orders, so the employees' enforceable rights under the mandamus remained intact. The Court also treated the crystallised bonus claim, once it became a debt due, as property. By extinguishing that accrued debt in substance for the benefit of a State-controlled corporation, the Act amounted to compulsory acquisition under Article 31(2). Because no compensation was provided, the legislation was invalid. en-us Tue, 21 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Oct 2015 18:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168350 An accrued bonus entitlement recognised by a final writ of mandamus was not displaced merely because later legislation altered the underlying settlement; the statute neither referred to the judgment nor contained a non obstante clause directed to judicial orders, so the employees' enforceable rights under the mandamus remained intact. The Court also treated the crystallised bonus claim, once it became a debt due, as property. By extinguishing that accrued debt in substance for the benefit of a State-controlled corporation, the Act amounted to compulsory acquisition under Article 31(2). Because no compensation was provided, the legislation was invalid. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168350