<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1994 (12) TMI 321 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168484</link>
    <description>The tribunal scheme under Part XIV-A of the Constitution and the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 is discussed as having been upheld earlier on the basis of an efficacious alternative mechanism for judicial review. The text notes later decisions recognising tribunal power to decide constitutional validity and permitting single-member Benches in specified cases, but also records judicial reservations about treating tribunals as equivalent to High Courts. In view of those post-Sampath Kumar developments, the commentary states that substantial doubts arose about tribunal structure, Bench composition, and the scope of judicial review, warranting reconsideration by a larger Bench.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378141" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (12) TMI 321 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168484</link>
      <description>The tribunal scheme under Part XIV-A of the Constitution and the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 is discussed as having been upheld earlier on the basis of an efficacious alternative mechanism for judicial review. The text notes later decisions recognising tribunal power to decide constitutional validity and permitting single-member Benches in specified cases, but also records judicial reservations about treating tribunals as equivalent to High Courts. In view of those post-Sampath Kumar developments, the commentary states that substantial doubts arose about tribunal structure, Bench composition, and the scope of judicial review, warranting reconsideration by a larger Bench.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168484</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>