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

2006 Supreme(Bom) 207

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD
Satish Bora and Try Builders – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


( 1 ) THE petitioner impugns in these proceedings, the validity of a declaration issued by the Government of Maharashtra under section 126 (4) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 read with section 6 of the Land acquisition Act, 1894, on 21st March, 2005 and 6th April, 2005. The lands which form the subject-matter of the acquisition proceedings comprise of C. T. S. No. 481 (part) ofrasta peth, Pune and admeasure 4055. 37 sq. mtrs. The petitioner which is a partnership firm of builders and Developers claims to have en- tered into a development agreement with the ninth respondent on 10th January, 2005. The revised Development Plan for the City of pune was sanctioned by the State Government on 5th January, 1987 and the Plan came into force on 5th February, 1987. Under the Development Plan as sanctioned, the land was reserved for Government purposes and the acquiring body was Government in the Education Department. The ninth respondent served a purchase notice under section 127 calling upon the respondents to take steps for the acquisition of the land. On 12th April, 2001, the 9th respondent was informed by the office of the District Employment and Self Employment Gu




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