https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171076 Section 48AA of the Advocates Act was construed purposively to mean that "the date of that order" refers to the date the order is communicated to, or otherwise known by, the person seeking review. On that reading, the sixty-day period limits the exercise of review jurisdiction but does not extinguish it merely because time has elapsed from the date of the order, so the review application was treated as timely. The constitutional challenge based on alleged unworkability and unreasonableness also failed because the practical construction preserved an effective review remedy. The appeals succeeded, the impugned orders were set aside, and enrolment was restored. en-us Tue, 06 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jul 2015 12:14:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171076 Section 48AA of the Advocates Act was construed purposively to mean that "the date of that order" refers to the date the order is communicated to, or otherwise known by, the person seeking review. On that reading, the sixty-day period limits the exercise of review jurisdiction but does not extinguish it merely because time has elapsed from the date of the order, so the review application was treated as timely. The constitutional challenge based on alleged unworkability and unreasonableness also failed because the practical construction preserved an effective review remedy. The appeals succeeded, the impugned orders were set aside, and enrolment was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 06 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171076