https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307345 The court found that the appointment of the Arbitrator by the Assistant Director General (TR) instead of the Central Government violated Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. As a result, the award passed by the Arbitrator was deemed without jurisdiction and unsustainable in law. Additionally, the court held that the unreasoned award was impermissible, emphasizing the need for transparency and reasons in decisions with civil consequences. Consequently, the court set aside the award and remitted the matter to the Central Government for proper adjudication, allowing the writ application without costs. en-us Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Apr 2023 08:40:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307345 The court found that the appointment of the Arbitrator by the Assistant Director General (TR) instead of the Central Government violated Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. As a result, the award passed by the Arbitrator was deemed without jurisdiction and unsustainable in law. Additionally, the court held that the unreasoned award was impermissible, emphasizing the need for transparency and reasons in decisions with civil consequences. Consequently, the court set aside the award and remitted the matter to the Central Government for proper adjudication, allowing the writ application without costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307345