Back
DIPANKAR DATTA, G.S.KULKARNI
Nishant Karsan Bhagat – Appellant
Versus
City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. – Respondent
Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. public interest petitions addressing land reservations by nmmc. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. establishment and powers of cidco as new town development authority. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. legal requirements for revising development plans under mrtp act. (Para 10 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. procedural requirements and statutory obligations of nmmc regarding development plans. (Para 15 , 24) |
| 5. authority of state government to clarify roles of cidco and nmmc. (Para 35 , 36) |
| 6. powers of planning authority vs. new town development authority under mrtp act. (Para 57 , 58 , 60) |
| 7. legal determination of rights and duties between cidco and nmmc. (Para 70 , 79) |
| 8. court’s ruling on cidco's auction rights upheld. (Para 80 , 91) |
JUDGEMENT :
G. S. Kulkarni, J.
| A | Prelude | 1-3 |
| B | Factual Matrix | 4-30 |
| C | Prayers in PIL No.22 of 2022 & PIL No.37 of 2022 | 31 |
| D | Respondent’s Pleadings: | 32-49 |
| E | Submissions on behalf of the Petitioners | 50 |
| F | Submissions on behalf of Respondents | 51-54 |
| G | Questions for Determination | 55 |
| H | Relevant Provisions of the MRTP Act | 56 |
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
