https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288792 The State Government was treated as a necessary party in compensation objection proceedings because the statutory scheme deemed it a participant and required separate notice through the Collector; the general Gazette publication did not replace that special notice. A decision taken without notice to that necessary party was not binding, so the Compensation Officer could consider reopening the proceedings and decide the privilege objection before further steps were taken. Prohibition was not available because the officer had jurisdiction to determine that preliminary question in the first instance. The appeal therefore succeeded only in setting aside the prohibition, while the matter was left for fresh decision according to law. en-us Thu, 09 Dec 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Jun 2020 16:05:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288792 The State Government was treated as a necessary party in compensation objection proceedings because the statutory scheme deemed it a participant and required separate notice through the Collector; the general Gazette publication did not replace that special notice. A decision taken without notice to that necessary party was not binding, so the Compensation Officer could consider reopening the proceedings and decide the privilege objection before further steps were taken. Prohibition was not available because the officer had jurisdiction to determine that preliminary question in the first instance. The appeal therefore succeeded only in setting aside the prohibition, while the matter was left for fresh decision according to law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 09 Dec 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288792