https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196251 The amended scheme-making process for religious institutions was upheld because it required a judicial-service Commissioner, a preliminary inquiry by the Assistant Commissioner, procedure broadly aligned with the Code of Civil Procedure, and a direct appeal to the High Court. These safeguards converted the process into a judicially supervised determination, and the shorter limitation period and absence of an automatic stay did not make the restriction on the Mathadipathi's rights unreasonable. Section 79-A was also upheld because it validly deemed earlier schemes to have been framed under the amended Act, while extending the new statutory safeguards, including appeal to the High Court. The validating fiction was treated as constitutionally competent and not as an impermissible bar on the article 32 remedy. en-us Fri, 20 Jan 1956 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Nov 2017 12:00:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196251 The amended scheme-making process for religious institutions was upheld because it required a judicial-service Commissioner, a preliminary inquiry by the Assistant Commissioner, procedure broadly aligned with the Code of Civil Procedure, and a direct appeal to the High Court. These safeguards converted the process into a judicially supervised determination, and the shorter limitation period and absence of an automatic stay did not make the restriction on the Mathadipathi's rights unreasonable. Section 79-A was also upheld because it validly deemed earlier schemes to have been framed under the amended Act, while extending the new statutory safeguards, including appeal to the High Court. The validating fiction was treated as constitutionally competent and not as an impermissible bar on the article 32 remedy. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Jan 1956 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196251