<?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>1985 (9) TMI 347 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183997</link>
    <description>Article 324 confers broad constitutional power on the Election Commission to superintend, direct and control elections, and that power extends to general directions necessary for free and fair polls. The Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 was upheld as a valid exercise of that authority because it regulated symbol specification, reservation, recognition of political parties and allotment, and was supported by the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. Even to the extent any part was not directly traceable to statute or rules, it remained valid in areas not occupied by legislation. The constitutional challenge therefore failed and the Order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:17:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433030" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (9) TMI 347 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183997</link>
      <description>Article 324 confers broad constitutional power on the Election Commission to superintend, direct and control elections, and that power extends to general directions necessary for free and fair polls. The Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 was upheld as a valid exercise of that authority because it regulated symbol specification, reservation, recognition of political parties and allotment, and was supported by the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. Even to the extent any part was not directly traceable to statute or rules, it remained valid in areas not occupied by legislation. The constitutional challenge therefore failed and the Order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>