https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174595 Section 76 of the Mines Act, 1952, construed to impose liability on every relevant shareholder or director of a mine-owning company, did not violate Article 14 because the rejected alternative interpretation was the sole basis of the discrimination challenge. Section 59(3) required draft regulations to be referred to the Mining Board before valid regulation-making; its language, statutory scheme, purpose of informed consultation, and the limited urgency exceptions under Section 60 made prior reference a condition precedent. The validity of the Coal Mines Regulations, 1957, depended on factual inquiry into whether functioning Mining Boards were consulted, requiring remittal of the criminal proceedings for disposal on that basis. en-us Fri, 10 Feb 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174595 Section 76 of the Mines Act, 1952, construed to impose liability on every relevant shareholder or director of a mine-owning company, did not violate Article 14 because the rejected alternative interpretation was the sole basis of the discrimination challenge. Section 59(3) required draft regulations to be referred to the Mining Board before valid regulation-making; its language, statutory scheme, purpose of informed consultation, and the limited urgency exceptions under Section 60 made prior reference a condition precedent. The validity of the Coal Mines Regulations, 1957, depended on factual inquiry into whether functioning Mining Boards were consulted, requiring remittal of the criminal proceedings for disposal on that basis. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 10 Feb 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174595