DIPAK MISRA, S.K.KULSHRESTHA
Daya Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent
Understood. Please provide the legal document content (inside
( 1. ) THE questions of law involved being similar and the writ petitions being inter linked and inter connected were heard analogously and are hereby disposed of by this common order. As the pleadings are complete in W. P. No. 4072/2002, for the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts stated therein are adumbrated.
( 2. ) BEFORE we proceed to state the facts we may profitably refer to a paragraph from the decision rendered in the case of R. S. Joshi, Sales Tax Officer, Gujarat and Ors. v. Ajit Mills Ltd. and another, (1997) 4 SCC 98, wherein Krishna Iyer, J. , in his inimitable style expressed thus :--
"2. A prefactory caveat.-- When examining a legislation from the angle of its vires, the Court has to be resilient, not rigid, forward-looking, not static, liberal, not verbal - in interpreting the organic law of the nation. We must also remember the constitutional proposition enunciated by the U. S. Supreme Court in Munn v. Illinois viz. , that Courts do not substitute their social and economic beliefs for the judgment of legislative bodies. Moreover, while trespasses will not be forgiven, a presumption of constitutionality must colour judicial construction. These factors,
STATE OF GUJARAT Vs VAGHELA DAYABHAI CHATURBHAI
LINGAPPA POCHANNA APPELWAR Vs State of Maharashtra
H.S.SRINIVASA RAGHAVACHAR Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
R.CHANDEVARAPPA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
PREETI SRIVASTAVA Vs State of Madhya Pradesh
STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs L.ABU KAVUR BAI
AMBICA QUARRY WORKS Vs State of Gujarat
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.