https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173000 No enforceable right arose for allottees to demand transfer of shops, godowns and sheds on a hire-purchase basis under the U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964, because the statutory scheme vested property management in the Mandi Samiti and Board without imposing any duty to sell or transfer market premises. The proviso to Section 12 required prior Board approval for transfer of immovable property, and Section 26-L did not authorise compulsion to transfer. A director's letter could not create a legal entitlement absent a competent Board decision, so mandamus was unavailable. Judicial review of such policy matters was limited to illegality, arbitrariness, discrimination or mala fides, none being shown. en-us Tue, 01 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Nov 2015 09:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173000 No enforceable right arose for allottees to demand transfer of shops, godowns and sheds on a hire-purchase basis under the U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964, because the statutory scheme vested property management in the Mandi Samiti and Board without imposing any duty to sell or transfer market premises. The proviso to Section 12 required prior Board approval for transfer of immovable property, and Section 26-L did not authorise compulsion to transfer. A director's letter could not create a legal entitlement absent a competent Board decision, so mandamus was unavailable. Judicial review of such policy matters was limited to illegality, arbitrariness, discrimination or mala fides, none being shown. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173000