https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196839 The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Company Law Board's order, emphasizing the availability of an appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 as an alternative remedy. It deemed the impleadment of judicial officers as respondents impermissible, citing precedents discouraging such actions. The court highlighted the wide powers of High Courts under Article 226 but refrained from exercising writ jurisdiction when an efficacious alternative remedy existed. Consequently, the writ petition and applications were dismissed, with directions to comply with guidelines on non-impleadment of judicial officers. en-us Mon, 30 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Dec 2017 12:08:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196839 The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Company Law Board's order, emphasizing the availability of an appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 as an alternative remedy. It deemed the impleadment of judicial officers as respondents impermissible, citing precedents discouraging such actions. The court highlighted the wide powers of High Courts under Article 226 but refrained from exercising writ jurisdiction when an efficacious alternative remedy existed. Consequently, the writ petition and applications were dismissed, with directions to comply with guidelines on non-impleadment of judicial officers. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 30 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196839