Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI., S. Ravindra Bhat, J.
Karshaka Shabdam – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Anr. – Respondents
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 425 of 2021
Decided On : 12-09-2022
Article 32 - Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change - The court dismissed the petition challenging a draft notification issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, stating that there was no reason to exercise jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
Fact of the Case:
The petition challenged a draft Notification issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition, stating that there was no reason to exercise jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
Issues: Challenge to the draft Notification dated 03.10.2018 issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that there was no reason to exercise jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision: The instant writ petition was dismissed, and pending interlocutory application(s), if any, were disposed of.
ORDER
1. The challenge raised in the instant petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is to the draft Notification dated 03.10.2018 issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC).
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has accepted that this draft Notification was followed by subsequent draft Notification dated 06.07.2022. He further submits that his client has already raised objections to said draft Notification dated 06.07.2022 and the final Notification is yet to be issued.
3. Considering these facts, we do not find any reason to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The instant writ petition is, therefore, dismissed.
4. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any stands disposed of.
The court's jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India was not applicable in this case.
Section 33 of the Act provides an overriding effect to the provisions of the Act over anything inconsistent contained in any other law or in any instrument having effect by virtue of law other than t....
Article 32 of the Constitution of India provides the basis for seeking the quashing of the FIR in this case.
The pendency of proceedings before the Municipal Corporation does not automatically bar the exercise of jurisdiction by the Authority under RERA. The Authority has the power to determine whether the ....
Reliefs sought based on unconstitutional notification cannot be granted.
Point of Law : Territorial jurisdiction - Prior to Constitutional (Fifteenth Amendment Act, 1963, concept of cause of action was alien for adjudication of disputes by High Court under Article 226 of ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of 'cause of action' and the concept of territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution in relation to the notice....
The court cannot entertain petitions for interim relief under Article 226 when an alternative remedy is pursued without obtaining interim orders.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
