AI Overview...
-
May and Shall in Statutes - The use of may generally indicates discretion, while shall suggests a mandatory requirement. However, mere use of these words is not conclusive; their interpretation depends on the context, purpose, and object of the statute. Courts analyze the language and legislative intent to determine whether provisions are directory or mandatory Bachahan Devi VS Nagar Nigam - Rajasthan, Smt. Bachahan Devi VS Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur - Supreme Court.
-
Discretionary vs. Mandatory Power - The term may often signifies discretionary powers granted to authorities, such as the Settlement Commission's power to grant immunity under Section 32K, which is discretionary, not obligatory. Conversely, shall typically denotes mandatory obligations, as seen in provisions requiring certain actions to be performed Venky Hi-Tech Ispat Ltd VS Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission - Calcutta.
-
Judicial Approach to Interpretation - Courts tend to interpret provisions with may as directory and those with shall as mandatory, but this is not absolute. They consider the legislative purpose, the language used, and whether compliance is essential for the statute's effectiveness. For example, in cases where the provision is meant to guide rather than compel, may is read as directory Rajkumar Sahu VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh, Rajesh Soni VS Mukesh Verma - Crimes.
-
Reading Down and Harmonization - When statutory provisions seem inconsistent, courts may read shall as may to harmonize the provision with the overall legislative scheme, especially if the provision is procedural rather than substantive. This approach ensures that statutory objectives are met without imposing unnecessary rigidity Bhikhabhai VS STATE OF GUJARAT - Gujarat, BHIKHABHAI DEVSHI VS STATE - Gujarat.
-
Exceptions and Contextual Factors - Certain provisions explicitly state their mandatory nature, and breach of such provisions can have significant legal consequences. Nonetheless, courts assess the context, object, and purpose of the statute to determine whether a breach affects the statute's overall mandate or can be considered procedural TRIBHUWAN PRASAD VS STATE OF U. P. - Allahabad.
Analysis and Conclusion
The interpretation of will (or may and shall) in statutes hinges on context, legislative intent, and purpose. May typically indicates discretion, while shall suggests obligation. However, courts often analyze the language and purpose to determine whether provisions are directory (permissive, procedural) or mandatory (compulsory, substantive). This nuanced approach ensures that statutory provisions are applied in harmony with legislative intent, allowing flexibility where appropriate and enforcing mandatory duties when necessary.
References: - Bachahan Devi VS Nagar Nigam - Rajasthan - Smt. Bachahan Devi VS Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur - Supreme Court - Venky Hi-Tech Ispat Ltd VS Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission - Calcutta - Rajkumar Sahu VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh - Rajesh Soni VS Mukesh Verma - Crimes - Bhikhabhai VS STATE OF GUJARAT - Gujarat - TRIBHUWAN PRASAD VS STATE OF U. P. - Allahabad
Search Results for "Interpretation of the Term will and its Use in Statute being Directory and Discretionary"
2008 0 Supreme(Raj) 189 • India - Rajasthan
LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, ARIJIT PASAYAT
used — The question whether a particular provision of a statute is directory or mandatory where the expression shall and may are ... ; }kjk vihy Lohdkj djuk mfpr FkkA ¼in la-35 ls 37½ ... (b) Interpretation ... of Statute — C.P.C., Order 41 Rule 25 — Whether the provisions are mandatory, not withstanding the fact that the word may has been ... Mere use of word may or shall is not conclusive. The question whether a particular provision of a statute is directory or ma....
2008 1 Supreme 756 • India - Supreme Court
... (d)Interpretation of Statutes – Directory or mandatory – Consideration ... ... (c)Interpretation of Statutes – Mere use of word ‘may’ or ‘shall ... ’ is not conclusive – The question whether a particular provision of a statute is directory or mandatory has to be decided by ascertaining ... Mere use of word ‘may’ or ‘shall’ is not conclusive. The question whether a particular provision of a statute is #HL_START....
• India - Calcutta
HARISH TANDON
The term "may" in Section 32K indicates discretionary power, not a mandatory obligation. ... Whether the Settlement Commission's discretion to grant immunity from penalties is mandatory or discretionary. ... The power to grant immunity under Section 32K is discretionary, not mandatory, and depends on factors such as cooperation, full disclosure ... State of Rajasthan it was observed that: ... "The term shall in its ordinary significance is mandatory and the court shall ordinarily give that int....
2019 0 Supreme(MP) 148 • India - Madhya Pradesh
S.K.SETH, R.S.JHA, NANDITA DUBEY, RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY, SANJAY DWIVEDI
[Para 46 ... (14) Interpretation of Statutes -- Court has no power to ... [Paras 43 & 44 ... (12) Interpretation of Statutes -- words clear, plain ... Principles of Statutory Interpretation by Justice G. P. Singh (14th Edition) relied on. ... State of Gujarat and others, AIR 1986 SC 1323, the Supreme Court in paragraph 50 has held that “where the statute confers discretionary powers in exercise of administrative authority, the validity or constitutionality of such pow....
1982 0 Supreme(Guj) 51 • India - Gujarat
D.H.SHUKLA
passed necessarily every time when a new General Board comes into existence after municipal election - Consequently reject the interpretation ... It is not admitted that the interpretation of section 30 of the Act put forward by the petitioner is correct. The provision is mandatory and not directory. ... It may further be noticed that the clear language of the sub-sec. is that the Cor- poration may pass such a resolution The power to be exercised by the Corporation under sub-sec. (2) of sec. 30 of the Act is clearly not mandatory not even....
1992 0 Supreme(MP) 560 • India - Madhya Pradesh
T.N.SINGH, S.K.DUBEY, R.C.LAHOTI
[Para 10 ... (6) Interpretation of Statutes -- Legislature is supposed ... of the words "may exercise" shows the provision to be directory. ... The provision obviously is meant to be a directory one and not mandatory. ... 167 including the power contemplated under the proviso to sub-section (2) and the use of the word "may", at the same time, is meant to impart to the power purely discretionary character. ... The provision obviously is meant to he a directory one and ....
• India - Crimes
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
but of directory in nature – Judicial Magistrate has rightly passed interim compensation in favour of complainant – Petition dismissed ... in such a manner that it secures interest of complainant as well as accused – Word ‘may’ may be treated as ‘shall’ and it is not discretionary ... but of directory in nature. ... The distinction of mandatory compliance or directory effect of the language depends upon the language couched in the statute under consideration and its object, purpose and effect. The disti....
1986 0 Supreme(Guj) 117 • India - Gujarat
S.B.MAJMUDAR, R.A.MEHTA, P.R.GOKULAKRISHNAN
Therefore, the provision in the Rule has to be read down as directory and discretionary so as to make it harmonious and consistent with the statutory provision in the Act. ... Rule 4 (10) is directory and discretionary and that provision and the word shall in this context is required to be read as may. This is in respect of the latter part of R. 4 (10) and not in respect of the first part of R. 4 (10) which has reference to cases having element of escape. ... " ... ( 11 ) IN that case, having regard to the legislative in....
1986 0 Supreme(Guj) 118 • India - Gujarat
S.B.MAJMUDAR, R.A.MEHTA, P.R.GOKULAKRISHNAN
Therefore the provision in the Rule has to be read down as directory and discretionary so as to make it harmonious and consistent with the statutory provision in the Act. ... Rule 4 (10) is directory and discretionary and that provision and the word shall in this context is required to be read as may. This is in respect of the latter part of Rule 4 (10) and not in respect of the first part of Rule 4 (10) which has reference to cases having element of escape. ... ... ( 11 ) IN that case having regard to the legislative i....
2018 0 Supreme(All) 947 • India - Allahabad
AJAY BHANOT
reasons for failing to hear matter have been disclosed – Long intervals between dates of hearing is sufficient to defeat mandate of statute ... Condoning such a breach does not, however, render the statutory provision directory or discretionary. The breach of the particular provision is treated in the circumstances as not involving a breach of the statute taken as a whole. ... A second reason for the tangle in this area is the use of the terms “mandatory” and “directory”; the latter #H....
Filter by Legal Phrase
