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

ABDUL THASSIM v. EDMUND RODRIGO (DIVISION COURT)


Abdul Thassim V. Edmund Rodrigo, (Division Court)

1947 Present : Howard C.J., Keuneman, Wijeyewardene,
Canekeratne JJ. And Nagalingam A.J.

ABDUL THASSIM,
Petitioner, and EDMUND RODRIGO
(controller of Textiles) ,
Respondent.

167-Applicaton for a Writ of Certiorari against the
Controller of Textiles

Writ of certiorari - Regulation 62 of Defence (Control of Textiles) Regulations, 1945-Judicial nature of Textile Controller's duty-Courts Ordinance )Cup. 6), s. 42-Meaning and effect of words "or other person or tribunal" and "according to law"- Scope of the rule of ejusdem generis.

The Controller of Textiles, when he exercises functions under Regulation 62 of the Defence (Control of Textiles) Regulations, 1945, is a "person or tribunal that he can only act when he has "reasonable grounds" indicates that he is acting judicially and not exercising merely administrative functions. He is, therefore, amenable to a mandate in the nature of a writ of certiorari.

The ejusdem generis rule cannot be applied in the interpretation of the words "or other person or tribunal" which appear in section 42 of the courts Ordinance.

The writs specified in section 42 of the Courts Or



















































































































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