A communi observantia non est recedendum

Where a thing was provided to be done in a particular manner it had to be done in that manner and if not so done same would not be lawful, other methods of performance were necessarily forbidden

Where a power was given to do a certain thing in a certain way, that thing was to be done in that way or not at all.

Meanings of the maxim are that "where a thing is provided to be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in that manner and if not so done, same would not be lawful

Where power was given to do certain thing in a certain way that must be done in that way or not at all and other methods of performance were necessarily forbidden.

Where a thing was provided to be done in a particular manner, same had to be done in that manner and if not done, so would not be lawful.

Where a thing was provided to be done in a particular manner, it had to be done in that manner and if not done so, it would not be lawful.

Where a thing was provided to be done in a particular manner, it had to be done in that manner and if not so done the same would not be lawful.

First Information Report was recorded against accused under 5.420, P.P.C. and S.3, Price Control and Prevention of Profiteering and Hoarding Act, 1975

Alleged recovery of more amount than due allegedly by supplying less quantity of diesel, would not come within definition of "fraud"

Provisions of S.420, P.P.C., thus, would not be applicable, but matter of less measuring of diesel was to be dealt with under Punjab Weights and Measures (International System) Enforcement Act, 1975 whereunder petrol or other fuel was to be checked by Inspector or any other person authorised in that behalf by Government

Neither complainant could lodge F.I.R. before police nor police could take cognizance of complaint

Only Inspector duly authorised or any other authorised person could check/measure petrol/fuel pump of accused and Inspector could file complaint before Magistrate

In view of maxim "A communi observentia non est recedendum" (where a thing was provided to be done in that manner and, if not so done, same would not be lawful), power and authority to set law in motion was linked with substantive jurisdiction without which proceedings could not be initiated

Police could not claim supervisory jurisdiction in matters like supply of less quantity in view of existence of substantive-cum-procedural codified law in that respect whereby only Inspector could lodge F. I. R.

Provisions of Punjab Weights and Measures (International System) Enforcement Act, 1975 which was applicable in case and which had provided substantive and procedural law, having not been followed, F.I.R. recorded by police exceeding its jurisdiction, was liable to be quashed.

Power and authority to set law in motion, was linked with substantive jurisdiction without which proceedings could not be initiated and consequently, proceeded with

Watertight compartments of jurisdiction had to play vital legal role.

A communi observantia non est recedendum " A communi observantia non est recedendum" (Where a thing was provided to be done in a particular manner, it had to be done in that manner and if not so done, it would not be lawful).

A communi observantia non est recedendum If doing of a particular thing is made lawful. doing of something in conflict of that will be unlawful.

Where a thing was provided to be done in a particular manner, it had to be done in that manner and if not so done, the same would not be lawful.