https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287998 Section 4(1)(a) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 was treated as vesting revocation power in the Provincial Government's own opinion, so the existence of public interest, default, and whether the default was wilful and unreasonably prolonged were not open to ordinary judicial reassessment. The majority held that review was confined to mala fides or collateral purpose, and that the notice issued by Government sufficiently disclosed the basis of action. A challenge based on natural justice was not entertained on the pleadings as framed, while the dissent considered the default and notice grounds judicially examinable. en-us Tue, 01 Oct 1946 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 May 2020 17:40:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287998 Section 4(1)(a) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 was treated as vesting revocation power in the Provincial Government's own opinion, so the existence of public interest, default, and whether the default was wilful and unreasonably prolonged were not open to ordinary judicial reassessment. The majority held that review was confined to mala fides or collateral purpose, and that the notice issued by Government sufficiently disclosed the basis of action. A challenge based on natural justice was not entertained on the pleadings as framed, while the dissent considered the default and notice grounds judicially examinable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 Oct 1946 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287998