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
Grant Of Bail Can't Be Made Dependent On Surrender Of Co-Accused : Supreme Court
A Division Bench of the Supreme Court, while allowing a bail plea, held that the grant of bail to a co-accused person cannot be contingent on the surrender of another accused who is also pertinently the main accused in the ...
Motor Accident Claims – Social Status Of Deceased To Be Considered If There’s No Definite Proof Of Income: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has reinstated an award originally granted by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (MACT). The apex court expressed disappointment over the approach taken by the High Court in evaluating the evidence and reinstated the MACT’s verdict. The Court ...
Navigating Real Estate Challenges: A Solicitor's Insight
Introduction: In the intricate world of real estate, consumers often find themselves entangled in a web of complexities that demand legal acumen and guidance. As a solicitor passionate about serving my clients, I feel compelled to shed light on the ...
UAPA| Terrorism Cases Not To Be Taken Lightly: Supreme Court Sets Aside Default Bail
In a case pertaining to grant of default bail to a person accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (“UAPA”), the Supreme Court yesterday allowed an appeal filed by the Delhi police, observing that the High Court fell in ...
Freezing of Bank Accounts by ED/GST/Police – Legal Remedies Explained
Has your bank account suddenly been frozen by the Enforcement Directorate, GST authorities, or police investigation? For businesses and individuals alike, a frozen bank account can bring operations to an immediate halt. Why Bank Accounts Are Frozen by Authorities Authorities ...
75% Eligibility Condition For Admission To Sports Quota ‘Unwarranted & Discriminatory
The Supreme Court has held that the eligibility condition of minimum 75% marks does not promote the object of introducing the sports quota, and such criterion subverts the object and falls afoul of the equality clause in Article 14 of ...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment