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

2001 Supreme(AP) 1201

B.SUDERSHAN REDDY
Road Metal Industry – Appellant
Versus
Government Of A. P. , Revenue Department – Respondent


B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) SHORN of the details of claim of the petitioner-the validity of the decision of the government to part away and alienate huge extent of land adjoining the city of hyderabad in favour of Brahma Kumari educational Society and Mahesh Bhupati tennis Academy (respondents 5 and 6 herein) falls for consideration in this writ petition.

( 2 ) THE question that falls for consideration is as to whether the government has any unlimited discretion to alienate the properties of the State in any manner whatsoever and to whomsoever without any due regard to the relevant statutory scheme?

( 3 ) BEFORE delving deep into the said important question that falls for consideration, it may be interesting to notice the stand in principle taken by the government and its understanding about the issue as is evident from the counter- affidavit filed by the Joint Secretary to the government, Revenue Department for and on behalf of the State Government: "basically, the Government being the owner of the land can allot it for any purpose, which is conducive to the welfare of the State. There are also some statutory provisions, which provided inter alia for such assignment e. g. . Board s





























































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