Checkout Forums Vivek Narayan Sharma Vs. Union of India (02/01/2023)

Tagged: ,

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
  • #120568 Reply

    Important questions fall for consideration:

    “(i) Whether the notification dated 8th November 2016 is ultra vires Section 26(2) and Sections 7, 17, 23, 24, 29 and 42 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934;

    (ii) Does the notification contravene the provisions of Article 300A of the Constitution;

    (iii) Assuming that the notification has been validly issued under the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 whether it is ultra vires Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution;

    (iv) Whether the limit on withdrawal of cash from the funds deposited in bank accounts has no basis in law and violates Articles 14, 19 and 21;

    (v) Whether the implementation of the impugned notification(s) suffers from procedural and/or substantive unreasonableness and thereby violates Articles 14 and 19 and, if so, to what effect?

    (vi) In the event that Section 26(2) is held to permit demonetization, does it suffer from excessive delegation of legislative power thereby rendering it ultra vires the Constitution;

    (vii) What is the scope of judicial review in matters relating to fiscal and economic policy of the Government;

    (viii) Whether a petition by a political party on the issues raised is maintainable under Article 32; and

    (ix) Whether District Co-operative Banks have been discriminated against by excluding them from accepting deposits and exchanging demonetized notes.”

    [See the full post at: Vivek Narayan Sharma Vs. Union of India (02/01/2023)]

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
Reply To: Vivek Narayan Sharma Vs. Union of India (02/01/2023)
Your information:

%d bloggers like this: