https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168933 The Supreme Court held that the President's order dated May 15, 1961, did not constitute a decision under Article 217(3) of the Constitution. The Court directed the matter to be formally decided by the President under Article 217(3), allowing the appellant to present evidence regarding his date of birth. The outcome depended on the President's decision, with the appellant either continuing as a Judge until superannuation if favored or upholding the Chief Justice's retirement order if not. The appeal was disposed of without costs. en-us Mon, 09 Nov 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Apr 2015 18:02:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168933 The Supreme Court held that the President's order dated May 15, 1961, did not constitute a decision under Article 217(3) of the Constitution. The Court directed the matter to be formally decided by the President under Article 217(3), allowing the appellant to present evidence regarding his date of birth. The outcome depended on the President's decision, with the appellant either continuing as a Judge until superannuation if favored or upholding the Chief Justice's retirement order if not. The appeal was disposed of without costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 09 Nov 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168933