<?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>1960 (1) TMI 42 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200428</link>
    <description>A municipal prosecution was examined on two linked questions: whether the Health Officer&#039;s earlier special delegation to sanction and institute complaints remained in force despite later general administrative orders, and whether section 537 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923 required strict compliance with the statutory mode of initiation. The majority treated the special delegation as continuing, but held that section 537 formed part of the mandatory prosecution machinery and could not be bypassed by an unauthorised complaint. On that reasoning, initiation without a duly authorised statutory complaint was jurisdictionally defective, so the conviction and sentence could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:23:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=515020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (1) TMI 42 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200428</link>
      <description>A municipal prosecution was examined on two linked questions: whether the Health Officer&#039;s earlier special delegation to sanction and institute complaints remained in force despite later general administrative orders, and whether section 537 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923 required strict compliance with the statutory mode of initiation. The majority treated the special delegation as continuing, but held that section 537 formed part of the mandatory prosecution machinery and could not be bypassed by an unauthorised complaint. On that reasoning, initiation without a duly authorised statutory complaint was jurisdictionally defective, so the conviction and sentence could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200428</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>