NDLI: Maharashtra Chess Association Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Constitution of India Art.226 Validity of such contracts contract Ousting jurisdiction of High Courtt
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Constitution of India – Art.226 – Ouster of High Court’s jurisdiction under, in view of existence of alternate remedy under the private agreement entered between the parties – If permissible – Second respondent, central governing authority for chess in India disaffiliated the appellant – Third respondent was affiliated in place of the appellant – Appellant filed writ petition – Second respondent raised preliminary objection that the Bombay High Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition – Bombay High Court held that Clause 21 of the agreement between the appellant and the second respondent (in the form of Constitution and Bye laws of the latter) ousted the jurisdiction of all other courts except the courts at Chennai – On appeal, held: No limitation can be placed on the powers of the High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction – Decision whether or not to entertain an action under its writ jurisdiction is fundamentally discretionary and remains to be taken by the High Court on the facts and circumstances of particular case – If the argument of the second respondent that the dispute should be heard and decided at Chennai is accepted, the High Court of Madras would hear the present matter – Therefore, the alternate remedy (i.e. writ petition before the High Court of Madras) is equal in every way to the present remedy sought by the appellant – Existence of an alternate remedy, whether adequate or not, does not create an absolute legal bar on the exercise of the writ jurisdiction by High Court – In the present case, the Bombay High Court relied solely on Clause 21 of the Constitution and Bye Laws to hold that its own writ jurisdiction is ousted – It failed to examine the case holistically and make a considered determination as to whether or not it should, in its discretion, exercise its powers u/Art.226 – Scrutiny to be applied to every writ petition u/Art.226 by the High Court is crucial safeguard of the rule of law under the Constitution – Not open to High Court to abdicate this responsibility merely due to the existence of a privately negotiated document ousting its jurisdiction – Judgment of the High Court set aside – Writ Petition restored to the file of the High Court for being considered afresh –Societies Registration Act, 1860. Constitution of India – Art.226 – High Court’s jurisdiction under –Contracts excluding the jurisdiction of all courts vis-a-vis contract conferring jurisdiction on one amongst multiple courts having proper jurisdiction – Validity of such contracts – Discussed– Indian Contract Act, 1872 – s.28.
Judge	Hon'ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 823
Petitioner	Maharashtra Chess Association
Respondent	Union Of India & Ors.
SCR	[2019] 10 S.C.R. 304
Judgement Date	2019-07-29
Case Number	5654

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Maharashtra Chess Association Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

U.o.i Vs. S.p. Nayyar

Nawal Kishore Sharma Vs. Union of India and Others

Union of India Vs. Rajasthan High Court & Ors.

Jacky Vs. Tiny@ Antony & Ors.

Asset Reconstruction Company (india) Limited Vs. S. P. Velayutham & Ors

Cement Workers’ Mandal Vs. Global Cements Ltd. (hmp Cements Ltd.) & Ors

Ramchandra Ganpat Shinde and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

State of Kerala & Ors. Vs. M.k.jose

The State of Goa Vs. Summit Online Trade Solutions (p) Ltd & Ors.

Maharashtra Chess Association Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Maharashtra Chess Association Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

U.o.i Vs. S.p. Nayyar

Nawal Kishore Sharma Vs. Union of India and Others

Union of India Vs. Rajasthan High Court & Ors.

Jacky Vs. Tiny@ Antony & Ors.

Asset Reconstruction Company (india) Limited Vs. S. P. Velayutham & Ors

Cement Workers’ Mandal Vs. Global Cements Ltd. (hmp Cements Ltd.) & Ors

Ramchandra Ganpat Shinde and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

State of Kerala & Ors. Vs. M.k.jose

The State of Goa Vs. Summit Online Trade Solutions (p) Ltd & Ors.

Maharashtra Chess Association Vs. Union of India & Ors.