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

1988 Supreme(Bom) 268

C.S.DHARMADHIKARI, V.S.KOTWAL
Manakchand Sarupchand Lunavat & others – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra & others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - C.S. DHARMADHIKARI, J.:---Since all these writ petitions involve common questions of law and fact and relate to the same proceedings, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgement.

2. A development plan for Nashik City was sanctioned by the State Government and brought into force in the year 1959. In this plan, the lands involved in these writ petition were reserved for road widening. Thereafter in the year 1975, the said plan was sought to be revised and a revised draft plan was published which came to be sanctioned in the year 1980 and came into force on 29th of November, 1980. In this revised plan also, the properties in question were reserved for road widening. On 19th of March, 1980 by a request letter to the collector in that behalf procedure for acquisition of lands was started by the then, Administrator of the Municipal Council, Nasik. In its turn the said proposal came to be forwarded by the Collector to the Special Land Acquisition Officer. Thereafter a notification dated 31st August, 1981 came to be published in the Government Gazette on 1st of October, 1981 under section 126(2) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 19


























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