Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- important-decisions:cic-case-laws:shri-nihar-ranjan-banerjee-cvo-and-shri-bidya-nand-mishra-dgm-vig-coal-india-ltd-vs-shri-mn-ghosh [2017/04/23 15:20] – Shrawan
+++ important-decisions:cic-case-laws:shri-nihar-ranjan-banerjee-cvo-and-shri-bidya-nand-mishra-dgm-vig-coal-india-ltd-vs-shri-mn-ghosh [2023/04/15 11:53] (current) – Shrawan
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ====== Power of Review by CIC ======
 {{like>}}{{tag>review,cic,power}}
-{{:important-decisions:cic-case-laws:commission-review.jpg?600 |}}
+{{ :important-decisions:cic-case-laws:commission-review.jpg?600 |}}
 The net upshot of these two decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court is that while in substantive matters there may arguably be no review.  In cases of procedural infirmities which may have led to or may be believed to have led to miscarriage of justice or where there is an error apparent on the face of it, the absence of a provision for review shall not be a bar on a given statutory authority assuming that power.  In other words, silence of law in regard to review does not prohibit a statutory authority from undertaking review in specific given circumstances.
@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 {{:important-decisions:cic-case-laws:at-16092009-06.pdf|Shri Nihar Ranjan Banerjee, CVO and Shri Bidya Nand Mishra, DGM(Vig), Coal India Ltd Vs Shri MN Ghosh}}
+~~socialite~~