https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291036 A declaration under Section 8(1)(d)(v) of the U.P. Court of Wards Act, 1912 was held invalid because Section 8(2) required an adequate opportunity of showing cause, and a mere notice seeking a written explanation was insufficient. The proprietor had sought an enquiry and hearing, but no real chance was given to place material or controvert the allegations, so the declaration was made without jurisdiction and quashed. Section 11 did not bar certiorari under Article 226, and the alleged alternative remedy under Section 13 did not prevent judicial review where the declaration had been made without authority. Possession of the property was restored and costs awarded. en-us Thu, 09 Aug 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Oct 2020 17:53:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291036 A declaration under Section 8(1)(d)(v) of the U.P. Court of Wards Act, 1912 was held invalid because Section 8(2) required an adequate opportunity of showing cause, and a mere notice seeking a written explanation was insufficient. The proprietor had sought an enquiry and hearing, but no real chance was given to place material or controvert the allegations, so the declaration was made without jurisdiction and quashed. Section 11 did not bar certiorari under Article 226, and the alleged alternative remedy under Section 13 did not prevent judicial review where the declaration had been made without authority. Possession of the property was restored and costs awarded. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 09 Aug 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291036