Can’t Seek Immunity From Legal Provisions Because Contract
Can’t Seek Immunity From Legal Provisions Because Contract In President’s Name: SC
|
Defending the Centre, ASG argued that the contract in the case stands on a different footing as it is entered into in the name of the President.
The Union of India cannot demand an immunity from the operation of pertinent legal provisions just because a contract is in the name of the President of India, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday.
A bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala, interpreted Article 299 of the Constitution to hold that the central government, as a party to a contract, cannot wriggle out of statutory bars by arguing that the contract is in the name of the President of India.
Article 299 provides that all contracts in the exercise of the executive power of the union or of a State shall be expressed to be made by the President or by the Governor of the State, and all such contracts will be executed by a person duly authorized in that behalf.
“Having considered the purpose and object of Article 299, we are of the clear opinion that a contract entered into in the name of the President of India, cannot and will not create an immunity against the application of any statutory prescription imposing conditions on parties to an agreement, when the Government chooses to enter into a contract,” held the judgment, authored by justice Narasimha.
Post Categories
Featured Posts
Latest Posts
Latest Posts
AI & the Judiciary: Boundaries and Risks
🧠 Introduction: A New Era for Justice Artificial Intelligence (AI) has rapidly entered almost every professional domain — and the legal world is no exception. From predictive analytics to legal research automation, AI is revolutionizing how lawyers, judges, and courts ...
Transgender Persons Can Avail Of Already Earmarked Reservations, The Centre Tells : Supreme Court
The Centre has informed the Supreme Court that transgender persons can avail the already earmarked reservations in jobs and educational admissions and there is no separate reservation being provided to them. In 2014, the top court directed the Centre and ...
Stop Misleading Advertisements, Will Impose Rs 1 Crore Cost On Every Product Claiming False Cure: Supreme Court To Patanjali Ayurved
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (November 21) reprimanded the Patanjali Ayurved for continuing to publish misleading claims and advertisements against modern systems of medicine. While considering a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association against misleading advertisements, the bench comprising ...
Supreme Court Notice To Airlines, Regulator Over Pee-Gate Victim’s Petition
New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday agreed to examine the plea of a 72-year-old woman, on whom a male co-passenger allegedly urinated on board an Air India flight in November last year, seeking a direction to the Centre, aviation regulator DGCA ...
Members Of Railway Protection Force Can Seek Benefit Under Employees Compensation Act Though RPF Declared As An Armed Force: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (26.09.2023), held that an officer of the Railway Protection Force (RPF) can seek compensation under Employees Compensation Act, 1923 even though the RPF has been declared to be an armed force of the Union. “..in ...
Won’t interfere with firecracker ban in Delhi: SC
Ahead of the festive season, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said that it would not interfere with a decision of a state government if it decides to impose a complete ban on firecrackers, including green crackers, to check pollution level ...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment