SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(SC) 347

G.L.OZA, K.JAGANNATHA SHETTY
Sundarjas Kanyalal Bhatija: Prahalad Hiranand Advani – Appellant
Versus
Collector, Thane, Maharashtra – Respondent


Judgment

K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, J.:- The case involved in these two appeals, with leave, seems indeed straightforward enough, but the High Court of Bombay made it, as we venture to think, unsatisfactory and in a sense against judicial propriety and decorum.

2. The facts which are of central importance may be stated as follows :

On June 19, 1982, the Government of Maharashtra issued a draft notification under See. 3(3) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (the "Act"). The draft notification proposed the formation of what is termed as "Kalyan Corporation" (the "Corporation"). It suggested the merging of Municipal areas of Kalyan, Ambarnath, Dombivali and Ulhasnagar. Against this proposal, there were many objections and representations from persons, companies and the authorities. Amarnath and Ulhasnagar Municipal bodies and also some of the residents therein submitted their representations. They objected to the merger of their municipal areas into the Corporation. It is said that in Ulhasnagar Municipal area, Sindhies are predominant. In 1947, they were the victims of partition of the country. Being uprooted from their home land, they have since settled down at Ulhasna





















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top