{"id":319127,"date":"2024-04-02T10:30:51","date_gmt":"2024-04-02T05:00:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=319127"},"modified":"2024-04-06T11:03:06","modified_gmt":"2024-04-06T05:33:06","slug":"patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Petition filed due to misguided over enthusiasm\u2019; Patna HC dismisses plea by a lawyer challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Patna High Court:<\/span> The present writ petition was filed by a lawyer alleging that Sections 2, 9, 12 and 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016<\/a> (‘the Amendment Act’) violated the basic structure of the Constitution and hence, was invalid, void, and unconstitutional. The Division Bench of K. Vinod Chandran, CJ.*<\/span>, and Harish Kumar, J., opined that a writ petition under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, was maintainable either for the purpose of enforcing a statutory or legal right or with respect to breach of statutory duty on the part of the authorities and petitioner had no enforceable right judicially recognized, insofar as the Amendment Act was concerned and he did not claim any prejudice having been caused to him. The Court thus dismissed the writ petition and refrained from imposing cost as the writ petition was filed due to misguided over enthusiasm of petitioner.<\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

Petitioner submitted that the Parliament acting on the recommendations of a Goods and Services Tax Council (‘GST Council’), was an abdication of legislative functions. Respondents submitted that massive exercise was undertaken to shift to the GST regime and the levy of indirect taxes till then conferred on the State having been taken over by the Union Parliament for purposes of bringing out a unified law for levy of taxes on goods and services. It was thus, the Council was constituted with the Union Finance Minister as its Chairperson and the Union Minister of State, Incharge of Revenue or Finance and the Ministers Incharge of Finance or Taxation or any other Ministers nominated by each State Government, as members.<\/p>\n

Respondent thus submitted that there was no abdication of the legislative functions merely because the recommendations were called for from the Council, which looked into the pan India grievances and those unique to each of the States; all of whom were represented in the Council. The Council also looked at the apportionment of tax collected between the Union and the States, for which again law had to be made by the Union Parliament and not the GST Council.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/p>\n

The Court relied on Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan<\/span> v. State of Maharashtra<\/span>, (2013) 4 SCC 465<\/a>, wherein the Supreme Court held that “a stranger cannot be permitted to meddle in any legal proceeding unless he satisfies the authority or court that he falls within the category of an aggrieved person”<\/span>. The Court opined that petitioner did not suffer any legal injury by the Amendment Act, especially since he was not a person involved in commercial activities. The Court also opined that petitioner also did not have a case that he was registered under the GST enactments, and he did not even have a ground of any prejudice having been caused to him by the mechanism of reverse charge under the GST regime.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that a writ petition under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, was maintainable either for the purpose of enforcing a statutory or legal right or with respect to breach of statutory duty on the part of the authorities and petitioner had no enforceable right judicially recognized, insofar as the Amendment Act was concerned and he did not claim any prejudice having been caused to him.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that the public interest asserted could not also be entertained since the dealers registered under the earlier value added tax regime, now shifted to the GST regime, by virtue of the Amendment Act could not be said to be a marginalized section, who were incapable of agitating their rights before the courts of law.<\/p>\n

The Court dismissed the writ petition and refrained from imposing cost as the writ petition was filed due to misguided over enthusiasm of petitioner. However, the Court cautioned petitioner from further actions of the same nature.<\/p>\n

[Amit Pandey v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine Pat 775<\/a>, decided on 1-4-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment authored by: Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Petitioner: Ashwini Kumar, Raj Kumar, M. Alam, Modassir Raza, Advocates; Amit Pandey, In Person<\/p>\n

For the Respondents: K.N. Singh, ASG; Alok Kumar, CGC; Kanak Verma, Anshuman Singh, Advocates<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The public interest asserted cannot be entertained since dealers registered under earlier VAT regime, now shifted to GST regime, by virtue of Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016 cannot be said to be a marginalized section, who are incapable of agitating their rights before the courts of law.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":316104,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[30319,12141,30748,19471,34542,34755,49013,29467,31021,7441,30265,43515,65339,67087,46868],"class_list":["post-319127","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-aggrieved-person","tag-article-226","tag-challenge","tag-constitution","tag-constitution-101st-amendment-act","tag-dismiss","tag-goods-and-service-tax","tag-gst-council","tag-parliament","tag-patna-high-court","tag-petition","tag-section-12","tag-section-18","tag-section-2","tag-section-9"],"yoast_head":"\nPatna HC dismisses plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Patna High Court dismissed plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, and 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Petition filed due to misguided over enthusiasm\u2019; Patna HC dismisses plea by a lawyer challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Patna High Court dismissed plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, and 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-04-02T05:00:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-04-06T05:33:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018Petition filed due to misguided over enthusiasm\u2019; Patna HC dismisses plea by a lawyer challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Patna HC dismisses plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-04-02T05:00:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-04-06T05:33:06+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\"},\"description\":\"Patna High Court dismissed plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, and 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Patna High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Petition filed due to misguided over enthusiasm\u2019; Patna HC dismisses plea by a lawyer challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\",\"name\":\"Simranjeet\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Simranjeet\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Patna HC dismisses plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016 | SCC Times","description":"Patna High Court dismissed plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, and 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Petition filed due to misguided over enthusiasm\u2019; Patna HC dismisses plea by a lawyer challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016","og_description":"Patna High Court dismissed plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, and 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-04-02T05:00:51+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-04-06T05:33:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Simranjeet","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018Petition filed due to misguided over enthusiasm\u2019; Patna HC dismisses plea by a lawyer challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Simranjeet","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/","name":"Patna HC dismisses plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-04-02T05:00:51+00:00","dateModified":"2024-04-06T05:33:06+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd"},"description":"Patna High Court dismissed plea challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, and 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Patna High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/patna-hc-dismisses-plea-challenging-ss-2-9-12-18-of-constitution-101st-amendment-act-2016-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Petition filed due to misguided over enthusiasm\u2019; Patna HC dismisses plea by a lawyer challenging Sections 2, 9, 12, 18 of the Constitution (101st Amendment) Act, 2016"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd","name":"Simranjeet","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Simranjeet"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Patna-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":212450,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/27\/ker-hc-s-174-of-kerala-sgst-act-which-saves-proceedings-arising-under-kerala-vat-act-held-valid\/","url_meta":{"origin":319127,"position":0},"title":"Ker HC | S. 174 of Kerala SGST Act which saves proceedings arising under Kerala VAT Act held valid","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 27, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court:\u00a0Dama Seshadri Naidu, J., dismissed a set of writ petitions challenging the legislative competence of the State of Kerala to enact Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Section 174 is a saving provision brought about by the State Legislature to save the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":224638,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/28\/pat-hc-discretionary-jurisdiction-under-art-226-of-the-constitution-can-be-exercised-when-no-alternative-efficacious-remedy-is-available\/","url_meta":{"origin":319127,"position":1},"title":"Pat HC | Discretionary jurisdiction under Art. 226 of the Constitution can be exercised when no alternative efficacious remedy is available","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 28, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Patna High Court: \u00a0A Division Bench of Dinesh Kumar Singh and Anil Kumar Sinha, JJ. allowed a civil writ application that was filed for quashing of an order passed by the District Magistrate, Bhagalpur in Misc (Excise) Case No. 159 of 2018-19, whereby the petitioner\u2019s vehicle had been confiscated. In\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":67641,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/09\/08\/president-signs-the-gst-constitution-amendment\/","url_meta":{"origin":319127,"position":2},"title":"President signs the GST Constitution Amendment","author":"SM","date":"September 8, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"NDTV has reported that the President has signed the 122nd Constitution Amendment Bill after it was passed by both houses of Parliament and ratified by 16 States. The 101st Constitution Amendment Act, 2016 lays the foundation for Parliament to enact the law on Goods and Services Tax.","rel":"","context":"In "Business Law"","block_context":{"text":"Business Law","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/Business_Law\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/GST.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/GST.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/GST.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/GST.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/GST.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":223873,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/06\/kar-hc-challenge-to-the-constitutional-validity-of-the-amendment-in-karnataka-transparency-in-public-procurements-act-making-concessions-in-favour-of-sc-st-rejected\/","url_meta":{"origin":319127,"position":3},"title":"Kar HC | Challenge to constitutional validity of amendment in Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act making concessions in favour of SC\/ST rejected","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 6, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: B. Veerappa, J. dismissed the writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India,\u00a0 by a Public Works Department Contractor. In this petition Section 6 of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements (KTTP) Act, 1999, was upheld by this Court. It enabled to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":273887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/patna-high-court-chancellor-universities-of-bihar-article-226-constitution-of-india-illegal-appointments-public-interest-litigation-remedies-writ-jurisdiction-legal-research-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":319127,"position":4},"title":"Patna High Court directs the Chancellor, Universities of Bihar to consider and decide issues pertaining to illegal appointments of Vice-Chancellors","author":"Editor","date":"September 17, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Patna High Court: In a writ petition filed for the quashing of the illegal appointments of Vice-Chancellors, Pro Vice Chancellors and other officers of the Universities of State of Bihar, the division bench of Sanjay Karol, CJ. and S. Kumar, J. has without expressing any opinion on merits disposed of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Patna High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/patna_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/patna_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/patna_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/patna_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/patna_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":34321,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/02\/01\/retrospective-applicability-of-payment-of-bonus-amendment-act-2015-stayed\/","url_meta":{"origin":319127,"position":5},"title":"Retrospective Applicability of Payment of Bonus (Amendment) Act, 2015, stayed","author":"Sucheta","date":"February 1, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: While dealing with question relating to the retrospective applicability of Payment of Bonus (Amendment) Act, 2015, the Court stayed the retrospective operation of the Amendment Act by way of an interim order.\u00a0 The Amendment Act, 2015 was introduced on 1st \u00a0January, 2016 and was made retrospectively applicable\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/319127","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=319127"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/319127\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/316104"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=319127"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=319127"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=319127"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}