Constitution of India

— Arts. 136 and 226 — Maintainability — Infructuous/Futile appeal — Taking note of subsequent events — Permissibility — State Financial Corporation (for short ``the Corporation'') executing agreement to advance loan to the respondent company — Properties of respondent mortgaged accordingly — Subsequently, the Corporation agreeing to sanction an additional amount of loan for expansion of the existing unit of the respondent with the stipulation that the respondent would submit the documents specified — Agreement registered although one of the requisite documents had not been furnished — The Corporation thereafter refusing to advance the additional amount for want of the said document — Treating the registration of the agreement as waiver of the Corporation's right to be furnished with the document in question and proceeding on the basis that the Corporation, as a statutory body, could not change its stand, High Court directing the Corporation to disburse the loan — In an appeal by the Corporation under Art. 136, Supreme Court finding that by the time the case came up before it, the unit of the respondent had stood closed — Possibility of revival of the unit seriously disputed between the Corporation and the respondent — In such peculiar facts of the case without expressing any conclusive opinion as to the correctness of the approach of High Court, held, issuance of a writ of or in the nature of mandamus to the Corporation to advance the amount of the additional loan to the respondent, would be futile — Hence, High Court's decision set aside — Scope of interference in writ jurisdiction of High Court with a decision taken by a statutory body, restated, (2006) 7 SCC 293-A

Constitution of India

— Art. 226 — Jurisdiction under Art. 226 — Statutes and statutory authorities — Decision taken by a statutory organisation — Scope of interference with, under Art. 226, restated, (2006) 7 SCC 293-B