Back
R. D. DHANUKA, M. M. SATHAYE
Yogesh Chandulal Mehta – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
R.D. DHANUKA, J.
1. Rule. Mr. Abhay Patki waives service on behalf of State. Mr. Abhijeet Desai waives service on behalf of Respondent No. 2-SRA. Mr. Cherag Balsara waives service on behalf of Respondent No. 4. Mr. Yogesh Patil waives service on behalf of Respondent No. 6. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, taken up for final hearing.
2. The Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 2338 of 2017 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have prayed for a Writ of Certiorari for quashing and setting aside the impugned Notification dated 17th November, 2016 issued under Section 14(1) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (for short “Slum Act”) to the extent of acquisition of Petitioner’s land bearing CTS No. 31 (part), admeasuring near about 3705.2 sq. mtrs of Village Dindoshi, Taluka Borivali, District Mumbai and also for quashing and setting aside the impuged Notice dated 20th March, 2017 and impugned Award dated 20th June, 2017 passed under Section 17 of the Slums Act to the extent of the writ property. The Petitioners also pray for writ of mandamus against the Respondents not to act upon the impugned Not
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the failure to submit a redevelopment scheme, despite an opportunity granted by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority, did not entitle the petitio....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the lack of notice from the Respondents did not prejudice the Petitioners' rights, as they were unable to submit a redevelopment scheme due....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the preferential right of the owner to redevelop the property under the Slum Act, the starting point for commencement of 'reasonable time' for rede....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that once land is acquired by the State Government under the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act, it vests absolutely in the State Government free from all ....
State cannot acquire private land for slum rehabilitation without recognizing and allowing landowners' preferential rights to develop the land.
Landowners possess a primary preferential right to undertake redevelopment under rehabilitation schemes; however, this right is subordinate to statutory procedural compliance, including the mandatory....
The court reaffirmed a landowner's preferential right to redevelop slum areas under the Maharashtra Slum Act, necessitating notice to the owner before acquisition proceedings, rendering subsequent ac....
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
