Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, AMIT BORKAR
Sunil Modi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dismissal of the pil petition (Para 1 , 3 , 24) |
| 2. governor's discretion in nominations (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. cabinet's power to withdraw nominations (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. requirement of formal decision for nominations (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. governor's authority limited by cabinet decisions (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
ORDER :
1. The application (IA No.195052/2023) for withdrawal of the proceedings is allowed. However, the Court has not expressed any opinion on the question of law raised which is kept open to be agitated in an appropriate case.
2. At this stage, Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the intervenor submits that the intervenor has applied for transposition. Liberty is granted to the intervenor to institute independent proceedings.
3. The Interlocutory Application is disposed of, permitting withdrawal of the Special Leave Petition in the above terms.
4. Pending applications, if any, including the application for intervention, stand disposed of.”
(i) It is pursuant to the liberty granted by Hon'ble Supreme Court by means of its order dated 11th July 2023, that the instant PIL petition has been instituted with the prayers as aforementioned.
(j) Duri
The Governor has discretion under Articles 163 and 171 of the Constitution but must act on Cabinet recommendations, which can be withdrawn before a formal decision is made.
Election - Powers and role of Governor to make nomination - Where nomination is pending for eight months, which is a sufficiently long period, it seems to be beyond ‘reasonable time' but this Court w....
The Governor's nominations under Article 171(5) require adherence to constitutional procedures, with judicial review available for actions deemed ultra vires or in bad faith.
The Governor holds discretionary power under Article 200 and is not mandated to adhere to a set timeframe for assenting bills.
(1) Political imbroglio in State Legislature of Maharashtra – Supreme Court cannot ordinarily adjudicate petitions for disqualification under Tenth Schedule in first instance. There are no extraordin....
“Arbitrary” and “capricious” in legal sense, as distinguished from opprobrious or popular meaning, are used in technical sense as meaning without rational basis.”
The exercise of the 'Doctrine of Pleasure' by the Chancellor must not be arbitrary or capricious; the court can intervene if such withdrawal lacks justification.
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
