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

2004 Supreme(SC) 99

COMMON CAUSE – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


( 1 ) THIS is an application styled as one seeking "clarifications, reconsiderations and modifications" in the judgment dated 8-10-2003 delivered by this Court.

( 2 ) WE have heard the learned counsel for the applicant. We are satisfied that the application does not seek any clarifications. It is an application seeking in substance a review of the judgment. By disguising the application as one for "clarification", the attempt is to seek a hearing in the open court avoiding the procedure governing the review petitions which, as per the rules 222 of this Court, are to be dealt with in chambers. Such an attempt on the part of the applicant has to be deprecated.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention to the following observation contained in the opinion of the third Judge in the High court:

"before parting, I would like to mention something which has troubled me a bit. Section 1 (3) of the Act is not in force. On what authority can the Central Government issue notification under Section 1 (3) of the Act?"

( 4 ) WE do not think that the abovesaid is a finding recorded by the learned judge. Be that as it may, this was not a point argued before the Court when the



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