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

2001 Supreme(AP) 932

B.SUBHASHAN REDDY, GHULAM MOHAMMED
Shyam Sunder Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, M. C. H. – Respondent


B. SUBHASHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) AT issue, is the validity of the action of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad in declaring the property of the petitioners as a slum area in exercise of the powers under Section 3 (1) of the Andhra pradesh Slum Improvement (Acquisition of land) Act, 1956.

( 2 ) THE notifications were issued and gazetted differently for different areas owned by the petitioners. While in W. P. No. 19117 of 1987, notification was issued on 14-10-1987 and gazetted on 5-11-1987, in W. P. NO. 673 of 1992 the notification was issued on 4-12-1991, which was gazetted on 26-12-1991. In the said writ petitions, the validity of the above notifications is assailed as being unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. Insofar as W. P. No. 9668 of 1987 is concerned, a declaration is sought for, that the action of respondents 1 and 2 in issuing slum area occupancy certificates to the tenants of the petitioners in premises bearing Municipal Nos. 5-4-51 to 5-4-108 and 5-4-123 to 5-4-182/2 as illegal as also the action of respondents 3 to 5 in issuing electricity connections to the above premises without the consent of the petitioners.

( 3 ) THE propert













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