TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso, there being no real threat of infringement of any of its rights, the petitioner does not have the cause of action even for moving this Court at this stage. Without a cause of action , the right of action is meaningless. This is not a fit case to even examine as to whether the show-cause notice is non est in the eyes of law. Noticing that a notice for hearing had been issued to such writ petitioner, the writ petition is disposed off. Since the final order on the proceedings was yet to be passed, the interest of justice would be sufficiently served if the petitioner were granted the liberty to file an application before the respondent no. 2 to urge before such respondent that in view of the ratio of the decision in Canon India [ 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h decisions. 2. It is admitted by Mr. Singh that ever since the impugned show-cause notice dated 23rd June 2014 was issued, there has neither been any infringement of any of the rights of the petitioner, protected either by the Constitution or by any relevant enactment, nor any threat of such infringement. 3. It seems to us that this writ petition is inspired because of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Canon India (supra). Law is well settled that the Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would step-in to assist a party who finds either his constitutional rights, fundamental or non-fundamental, and/or other legal rights to have been infringed by any authority answering the definition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reported in (2004) 3 SCC 440 [Special Director and Anr. vs. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse and Anr.]. 4. Bound by such decision as well as the other decisions that have been placed before us, we now proceed to consider whether interference, on facts and circumstances, would be justified. 5. There is no explanation in the writ petition as to what triggered it, in the first place, and what made the petitioner apprehend that adverse action is in the offing. That after issuance of the impugned show-cause notice the respondents have not acted in any manner to infringe the rights of the petitioner [it has been 7 (years) since], is an important circumstance that needs to be borne in mind. Also, there being no real threat of infringement of any of its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
