https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184638 The Supreme Court considered whether a release order under the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 could be invalidated for want of qualification in the Prescribed Authority, and whether possession could be restored for alleged breach of an undertaking to the High Court. It held that the Government notification conferring magisterial powers on the officer was effective, the officer had the requisite statutory experience, and, in any event, the de facto doctrine barred a collateral challenge because the order was made under colour of lawful authority. It also found no proved breach of the undertaking warranting restoration of possession. en-us Wed, 15 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:26:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184638 The Supreme Court considered whether a release order under the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 could be invalidated for want of qualification in the Prescribed Authority, and whether possession could be restored for alleged breach of an undertaking to the High Court. It held that the Government notification conferring magisterial powers on the officer was effective, the officer had the requisite statutory experience, and, in any event, the de facto doctrine barred a collateral challenge because the order was made under colour of lawful authority. It also found no proved breach of the undertaking warranting restoration of possession. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 15 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184638