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.
Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachudrecently spoke on how no technology is neutral and how it can reflect human values when deployed in the real world. The CJI spoke on how one must ponder the human and societal values ...
Dear community In the ever-evolving landscape of dispute resolution, the demand for faster and more efficient solutions is on the rise. As businesses and individuals seek alternatives to protracted litigation, arbitration has emerged as a compelling choice. Let's delve into ...
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 31) asked the Governments of Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Delhi to file affidavits setting forth the steps they have taken to control air pollution including the measures to curb crop burning. This ...
The Supreme Court observed that a cheque case against a partner of the firm cannot be quashed under Section 482 CrPC unless there is unimpeachable and incontrovertible evidence that he/she did not have any concern with the issuance of cheques. ...
The Rajya Sabha has passed the JThe Supreme Court has noted that children born out of irregular marriages, including one between a Muslim man and a Hindu woman, are legitimate and therefore eligible to inherit intestate property as per applicable ...
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 ...