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

2001 Supreme(Bom) 664

R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR
Vinaykumar Kachrulal Abad – Appellant
Versus
Honourable Minister, Revenue & Forest Department, – Respondent


JUDGMENT- R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J.:---Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records.

2. The following questions arise for determination in this petition :

(1) Who is the Competent Authority under section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (hereinafter called as “the Code”) to hear and decide the revision application when the same is filed before the State Government?

(2) Whether the application of the principles of natural justice, particularly, in relation to hearing of the parties by the Revisional Authority is excluded while disposing the revision application under section 257 of the Code?

(3) What is the scope of powers of the Appellate Authority under the Code while considering the application for relief in appeal arising from an order permitting non-agricultural use of land? Whether it includes power to impose restrictions against alienation of the land which is the subject matter of the grant of permission for non-agriculture use?

3. The petition arises from the order dated 13th April, 2001 of the respondent No. 1 and communicated by a letter dated 19th April, 2001 as well as from the orders dated 24th




























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