https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367734 Where the governing statute authorised the Sub-Divisional Officer to act against illegal extraction of minerals, the amendment to Rule 53 was treated as a procedural change in the mode of proceeding and not as a basis for review merely because the forum had changed. The High Court examined the amended rule, the officer's power under Section 247(7) of the M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, and the earlier directions, and found the precedent relied on by the review petitioners distinguishable because it arose in a different statutory setting. No error apparent on the face of the record was shown, so the review petitions failed. en-us Thu, 09 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Sep 2018 08:25:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367734 Where the governing statute authorised the Sub-Divisional Officer to act against illegal extraction of minerals, the amendment to Rule 53 was treated as a procedural change in the mode of proceeding and not as a basis for review merely because the forum had changed. The High Court examined the amended rule, the officer's power under Section 247(7) of the M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, and the earlier directions, and found the precedent relied on by the review petitioners distinguishable because it arose in a different statutory setting. No error apparent on the face of the record was shown, so the review petitions failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367734