<?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>2006 (5) TMI 488 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175007</link>
    <description>In externment proceedings under the Delhi Police Act, notice need only disclose the general nature of the allegations and a reasonable opportunity to explain them; disclosure of secret witness identities or particulars that would expose them is not required, so the vagueness challenge failed. Judicial review of an externment order is confined to whether the competent authority relied on relevant objective material, ignored irrelevant considerations, and reached a non-perverse satisfaction, and the recorded material supported that conclusion. The externment order was therefore upheld and the High Court judgment set aside, though the externment period had already expired.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2015 18:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=403951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (5) TMI 488 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175007</link>
      <description>In externment proceedings under the Delhi Police Act, notice need only disclose the general nature of the allegations and a reasonable opportunity to explain them; disclosure of secret witness identities or particulars that would expose them is not required, so the vagueness challenge failed. Judicial review of an externment order is confined to whether the competent authority relied on relevant objective material, ignored irrelevant considerations, and reached a non-perverse satisfaction, and the recorded material supported that conclusion. The externment order was therefore upheld and the High Court judgment set aside, though the externment period had already expired.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175007</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>