<?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>1988 (4) TMI 434 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191721</link>
    <description>A statutory power allowing the State Government to remit a Labour Court or Tribunal award before publication, without notice, recorded reasons, identified issues, or any guiding safeguards, was held to confer unguided and arbitrary discretion. Because the adjudication was quasi-judicial and the parties had already been heard, the unrestricted power to reopen the award in its entirety was inconsistent with Article 14. The provision was therefore struck down as unconstitutional, and the remission order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2018 17:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=465904" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (4) TMI 434 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191721</link>
      <description>A statutory power allowing the State Government to remit a Labour Court or Tribunal award before publication, without notice, recorded reasons, identified issues, or any guiding safeguards, was held to confer unguided and arbitrary discretion. Because the adjudication was quasi-judicial and the parties had already been heard, the unrestricted power to reopen the award in its entirety was inconsistent with Article 14. The provision was therefore struck down as unconstitutional, and the remission order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191721</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>