https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190511 Parliament validly conferred a statutory appeal to the Supreme Court under the constitutional field covering persons entitled to practise before the Court, because section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 in substance concerns enrolment, right to practise, and discipline of advocates within List I. Entry 26 of List III was treated as yielding to that extent, so article 138(2) did not defeat the provision. A Supreme Court Rule permitting preliminary hearing and rejection of unmeritorious section 38 appeals was also upheld as procedural only and within the Court's rule-making power, since it did not curtail the substantive right of appeal. en-us Mon, 08 Jan 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Feb 2017 17:20:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190511 Parliament validly conferred a statutory appeal to the Supreme Court under the constitutional field covering persons entitled to practise before the Court, because section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 in substance concerns enrolment, right to practise, and discipline of advocates within List I. Entry 26 of List III was treated as yielding to that extent, so article 138(2) did not defeat the provision. A Supreme Court Rule permitting preliminary hearing and rejection of unmeritorious section 38 appeals was also upheld as procedural only and within the Court's rule-making power, since it did not curtail the substantive right of appeal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 08 Jan 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190511