Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Justice Rohit, J
Vijendra Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Government of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. constitutional obligation to table cag reports. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. filing of petition under constitutional obligations (Para 3) |
| 3. delay in forwarding cag reports to the assembly. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 4. process and delays in tabling cag reports (Para 8) |
| 5. respondents' actions lead to further delay. (Para 10 , 12 , 14) |
| 6. violation of constitutional and statutory duties. (Para 16 , 17 , 19) |
| 7. arguments on withholding cag reports (Para 18 , 20) |
| 8. speaker's authority over legislative assembly. (Para 21 , 22 , 24) |
| 9. mandatory nature of laying cag reports. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 38) |
| 10. court's discretion in mandamus issuance. (Para 39 , 45) |
| 11. conclusion on petition’s outcome. (Para 48) |
| 12. mandatory constitutional imperative to lay cag reports (Para 49) |
JUDGMENT
1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , inter-alia, seeking the following prayer/s:-
“(a) issue an appropriate writ, order(s) or direction(s) in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing Respondent No. 1 and 2 to forward the 14 CAG Reports in a time bound manner to the Respondent No. 3 and further direct Respondent No. 3 to take all necessary and c
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
