9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advs For the Respondent : None ORDER CM APPL 8261/2016 (exemption) in W.P. (C) 1926/2016 CM APPL 8265/2016 (exemption) in W.P. (C) 1928/2016 1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. 2. The applications are disposed of. W.P. (C) 1926/2016 & CM APPL 8260/2016 (for stay) W.P. (C) 1928/2016 & CM APPL 8264/2016 (for stay) 3. These are two writ petitions seeking writ of prohibition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt Commission and while only taking on record the written submissions of the Respondents, and without hearing the Petitioners, orders were reserved by the Settlement Commission. 6. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in S. Govinda Menon v. The Union of India (1967) 2 SCR 566 to urge that a direction be issued to the Settlement Commission restraining it from further proceeding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rohibition might issue as under: "The jurisdiction for grant of a writ of prohibition is primarily supervisory and the object of that writ is to restrain courts or inferior tribunals from exercising a jurisdiction which they do not possess at all or else to prevent them from exceeding the limits of their jurisdiction. In other words, the object is to confine courts or tribunals of inferior or lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... More importantly, with orders having been reserved on the aforementioned applications the question of issuing a writ of prohibition to the Settlement Commission at this stage again does not arise. 10. However, this order should not preclude the Petitioners, if necessity so arises, to urge these very grounds to challenge the orders of the Settlement Commission on the aforementioned applications, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
