https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438383 The appellate court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the Writ Court, ruling in favor of the State of Jammu & Kashmir (now Union Territory of J&K). It found no fault with Clause 13(v) of the purchase order, holding that it was not discriminatory or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The court determined that the writ petitioners lacked standing to challenge the clause as they were not parties to the contract and had accepted its terms willingly. The appeal outcome favored the State, upholding the validity of the disputed clause in the purchase order. en-us Mon, 15 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 May 2023 09:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438383 The appellate court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the Writ Court, ruling in favor of the State of Jammu & Kashmir (now Union Territory of J&K). It found no fault with Clause 13(v) of the purchase order, holding that it was not discriminatory or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The court determined that the writ petitioners lacked standing to challenge the clause as they were not parties to the contract and had accepted its terms willingly. The appeal outcome favored the State, upholding the validity of the disputed clause in the purchase order. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 15 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438383