In Writ Petition No. 2502 of 1990, the Bombay High Court disposed of a petition challenging the sufficiency of gazette publication for notifications under the Customs Act, relying on the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ganesh Das Bhojraj to allow discharge of the rule.
Rule discharged with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
abs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2502 OF 1990
Laxmichand Suganmal Tantia .. Petitioner V/s
Union of india & Ors.
.. Respondents
Mr. N.M. Shah for the Petitioner.
Mr. A.S. Rao with Mr. R.B. Pardeshi for the respondents.
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & D.G. KARNIK, JJ.
P.C. :
2
is disposed of. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs.
(D.G. KARNIK, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether notification under section 25 of the Customs Act must be published by means other than the gazette.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India v. Ganesh Das BhojrajRelied on¶15
Union of India v. Ganesh Das Bhojraj, 2000 (116) E.L.T. 413 (S.C.)
Laxmichand Suganmal Tantia
Union of india
F.I. REBELLO
D.G. KARNIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
