<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1974 (10) TMI 115 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469739</link>
    <description>Section 303A of the Gujarat Panchayats Act was construed as an emergency power aimed at disturbed conditions, so &quot;to hold elections&quot; covers the entire electoral process, including delimitation and preparation of rolls, not merely polling and declaration of results. The court also treated the Government&#039;s satisfaction on inexpediency as largely non-justiciable once the objective existence of disturbances was shown. On the facts, continuing unrest supported the notification, and resort to this provision was not shown to be colourable or mala fide merely because another term-extension power existed. The notification was therefore upheld as valid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Oct 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2026 12:28:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=909610" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (10) TMI 115 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469739</link>
      <description>Section 303A of the Gujarat Panchayats Act was construed as an emergency power aimed at disturbed conditions, so &quot;to hold elections&quot; covers the entire electoral process, including delimitation and preparation of rolls, not merely polling and declaration of results. The court also treated the Government&#039;s satisfaction on inexpediency as largely non-justiciable once the objective existence of disturbances was shown. On the facts, continuing unrest supported the notification, and resort to this provision was not shown to be colourable or mala fide merely because another term-extension power existed. The notification was therefore upheld as valid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Oct 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469739</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>