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

1996 Supreme(SC) 1522

KULDIP SINGH, S.SAGHIR AHMAD
H. C. Venkataswamy – Appellant
Versus
Bangalore Development Authority – Respondent


(1) SPECIAL leave granted.

(2) THE land owned by the appellants was acquired by Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) for a development scheme called "Rajamahal Vilas II Stage". BDA passed a resolution dated 26-6-1984 whereunder it was decided that each of the appellants would be given a site measuring 40 x 60 free of cost. BDA did not implement the decision on the ground that the resolution was not approved by the State Government. The appellants challenged the decision of the State Government by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Karnataka High Court. A Division Bench of the High Court by the judgment dated 8-2-1991 dismissed the writ petition. These appeals are directed against the judgment of the High Court.

(3) WE may briefly state the facts: Land bearing various survey numbers measuring 1134 acres and 12 guntas owned by the appellants and other landowners was acquired by BDA for the development scheme as stated above. Under the scheme 558 high- income group houses were to be constructed. The appellants and other landowners (all farmers) did not allow the layout work to be carried out by BDA primarily on the g













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