• Duty of court   - Concession made by counsel - Court ought not to have issued the impugned directions merely because a request was made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents -  The same would hold true even if a concession was made by the counsel for the appellant -  The Court, while, exercising its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, ought to have confined itself to the subject matter and the issues raised by parties in the Writ Petition - The digression of or expansion of the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, would open precarious floodgates of litigation should the limitation on the supervisory jurisdiction not be observed mindfully - If for any reason, the Writ Court perceived the oral request made by the respondents to have justified the ends of justice and desired to accept the concession so made by the counsel for appellant-Society, the said request not being the subject matter of the Writ Petition required the Court to query whether the counsel for the appellant-Society has been authorized to make such a statement by the appellant-Society or whether any such resolution has been passed by the appellant-Society giving concession in matters of this nature - Since the required caution was not exercised by the learned Judges of the Writ Court, the directions issued by the Writ Court suffer from infirmity and hence require to be set aside  Advocate  Concession.      (2016)3 PLRSC 654

Register SCeJ  Free Updates*

Supreme Court e@journal

Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial 

Note: Please fill out the fields marked with an asterisk.