https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173415 Where the Ordinance left requisition to the Provincial Government's opinion that it was necessary or expedient for a public purpose, the majority treated the power as executive and the resulting requisition order as an administrative act. Because the statute did not impose a duty to act judicially and the public-purpose assessment formed part of the Government's subjective satisfaction, certiorari would not lie merely on the ground that the decision was wrong. The dissent considered public purpose a jurisdictional fact requiring judicial determination and would have allowed certiorari, but the governing effect is that the requisitioning power was not subject to merits review on that issue. en-us Fri, 15 Sep 1950 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:34:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173415 Where the Ordinance left requisition to the Provincial Government's opinion that it was necessary or expedient for a public purpose, the majority treated the power as executive and the resulting requisition order as an administrative act. Because the statute did not impose a duty to act judicially and the public-purpose assessment formed part of the Government's subjective satisfaction, certiorari would not lie merely on the ground that the decision was wrong. The dissent considered public purpose a jurisdictional fact requiring judicial determination and would have allowed certiorari, but the governing effect is that the requisitioning power was not subject to merits review on that issue. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 15 Sep 1950 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173415