JUDGMENT - S.C. PRATAP, J.:---This petition arises out of the proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, 'the Act'). In an enquiry under the Act, order was passed against the petitioners under section 8 thereof. Appeal therefrom failed. The petitioners' application under section 21 of the filed on 20th March, 1979 was promptly dismissed on 30th March, 1979. Their application under section 20 of the Act was also dismissed. The validity of these orders is questioned in this petition.

2. Mr. Gursahani, learned Counsel for the petitioners is right in submitting that the impugned orders under sections 20 and 21 of the Act are unsustainable because no hearing and no opportunity was given to the petitioners in that behalf. Even otherwise, no reasons have been disclosed in support of the said orders save and except the cryptic ground of public interest. The High Court has in several earlier writ petitions consistently set aside such and similar orders passed either under section 20 or under section 21 of the Act. Most of these orders partake uniform character and regrettably enough many of these orders are in a stereotyped cyclostyled format. Though th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document