The present PIL was filed by the petitioner based on two news reports, had there been some due diligence exercised and research done on the part of the petitioner, it would have been apparent that the issues raised by the petitioner in the instant PIL had already been addressed through relevant statutes, rules and notifications.
by Nilanshu Shekhar† and Rishabh Manocha††
Kerala High Court observed that concession or benefit of subsidy can be withdrawn prospectively and not retrospectively, by the Government.
Madras High Court dismissed Public Interest Litigation challenging the Government order warranting Adhaar authentication services in the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., from persons availing electricity subsidy in Tamil Nadu.
Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (Maharashtra): In an appeal filed under Section 100 of the Central Goods and Services Tax
Tripura High Court: A Division Bench of Akil Kureshi, CJ and S.G. Chattopadhyay J., while allowing the present petition, held, “One department
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. dismissed a writ petition where the main issue was ‘whether the manufacturing of corrugated
Calcutta High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Sanjib Banerjee and Abhijit Gangopadhyay, JJ. held that the subsidy allowed by the State
Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan, who had begun his submissions on Day 33 of the Aadhaar hearing, continued with his submissions before he 5-judge bench