https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293813 Where a State enactment is made in Hindi and an authorised English translation is later published, the Hindi legislative text remains controlling if the two versions diverge. The court treated the English version as an executive translation that cannot override the enacted Hindi rules, and distinguished precedents involving Central enactments. Applying that principle, it held that the Hindi version of the State rules prevailed over the English version, so the challenge based on the contrary reading failed and the writ petition was rejected. en-us Thu, 10 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Mar 2021 08:23:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293813 Where a State enactment is made in Hindi and an authorised English translation is later published, the Hindi legislative text remains controlling if the two versions diverge. The court treated the English version as an executive translation that cannot override the enacted Hindi rules, and distinguished precedents involving Central enactments. Applying that principle, it held that the Hindi version of the State rules prevailed over the English version, so the challenge based on the contrary reading failed and the writ petition was rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 10 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293813