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

2000 Supreme(Pat) 8

M.Y.EQBAL, SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, R.A.SHARMA
Mora Ho – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

R.A.SHARMA, J.

1. :-

I have gone through the two judgments prepared by my two learned brothers (S.J. Mukhopadhaya and M.Y. Eqbal, JJ.) who along with me were the members of the Full Bench, which was constituted to answer the questions referred, which have been reproduced on the 2nd page of the judgment of Hon ble S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

2 Hon ble S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. has held that Wilkinsons Rules have not been framed by the Governor General in the Council, who was the only competent authority at the relevant time to frame such Rules and, therefore, they lack statutory force and the law laid down by the Division Bench earlier in the case ofDulichand Khirwal, AIR 1958 Pat 366 and Mahendra Singhs case, AIR 1958 Patna 603,does not represent the correct legal position. Hon ble M.Y. Eqbal, J. on the other hand has taken a contrary view holding the said Rules to be statutory in nature. The decisions of the Division Bench of this Court in Dulichand Khirwal, AIR 1958 Patna 366 and Mahendra Singhs case, AIR 1958 Patna 603 (supra) have, accordingly, been approved by him.

3. For the reasons given by Hon ble S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. I agree with him that the Wilkinsons Rules have not been

































































































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