SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(SC) 234

G.T.NANAVATI, K.RAMASWAMY
Misbah Alam Shaikh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted. We have heard the counsel on both sides.

2. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Bombay High Court dated 30.10.95 made in W.P. No. 1349/95 dismissing the writ petition. The appellant has challenged the abolition of the Minority Commission set up by the State Government. When the matter had come up earlier, we had issued notice as to why the National Commission should not take up the issue of protecting the interest of the minorities in the State of Maharashtra as under :

"To show cause why the National Commission for minorities should not undertake the responsibility under the statute for the protection and safeguarding the interest of the minorities in the State of Maharashtra."

3. Pursuant thereto, the National Commission as well as the Central Government have filed their counter affidavits. The State of Maharashtra has independently filed its counter. Section 3 of the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992, for short the Act, provides that the Central Government shall constitute a body to be known as "the National Commission" for Minorities to exercise the powers conferred on, and to perform the functions assigned to it under the Ac









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top