<?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>1980 (9) TMI 280 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169307</link>
    <description>An order superseding a municipal committee under Section 238(1) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 attracts civil consequences because it vacates seats and deprives the body of its statutory office, powers and status. The text states that, absent clear exclusion by statute or necessary implication, prior notice and an opportunity to be heard are required, and urgency alone does not justify dispensing with audi alteram partem. It also explains that denial of natural justice is itself prejudice; a supposed lack of demonstrated prejudice does not cure the breach, except where only one lawful outcome is possible on admitted or indisputable facts. On that basis, the supersession notification is described as vitiated for breach of natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2015 16:52:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=381548" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (9) TMI 280 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169307</link>
      <description>An order superseding a municipal committee under Section 238(1) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 attracts civil consequences because it vacates seats and deprives the body of its statutory office, powers and status. The text states that, absent clear exclusion by statute or necessary implication, prior notice and an opportunity to be heard are required, and urgency alone does not justify dispensing with audi alteram partem. It also explains that denial of natural justice is itself prejudice; a supposed lack of demonstrated prejudice does not cure the breach, except where only one lawful outcome is possible on admitted or indisputable facts. On that basis, the supersession notification is described as vitiated for breach of natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169307</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>