https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194073 Article 226 is wide enough to support consequential relief after quashing an unlawful order where the legal conditions are already found to exist and nothing further remains for the statutory authority to decide; the Court need not confine itself to setting aside the order and may direct the relief that follows as a legal consequence. Under the Rent Control Order, once the prescribed conditions for permission to terminate tenancy were satisfied on the facts found, the Rent Controller had no residual discretion to refuse permission on grounds outside the scheme. The refusal and appellate affirmation were therefore unsustainable, though one view held the Court should only quash and remit for fresh consideration. en-us Thu, 16 Oct 1952 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:34:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194073 Article 226 is wide enough to support consequential relief after quashing an unlawful order where the legal conditions are already found to exist and nothing further remains for the statutory authority to decide; the Court need not confine itself to setting aside the order and may direct the relief that follows as a legal consequence. Under the Rent Control Order, once the prescribed conditions for permission to terminate tenancy were satisfied on the facts found, the Rent Controller had no residual discretion to refuse permission on grounds outside the scheme. The refusal and appellate affirmation were therefore unsustainable, though one view held the Court should only quash and remit for fresh consideration. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Oct 1952 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194073