Back
MILIND N. JADHAV
Ratilal Madan Waja – Appellant
Versus
Collector Mumbai Suburban District – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
1. Heard Mr. Zaidy, learned Advocate for Petitioner and Mr. Patki, learned Addl. Government Pleader for Respondents. By consent of both the learned Advocates, the Writ Petition is taken up for final hearing.
2. This Writ Petition is filed under the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs :
(b) that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or dir
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the material date for imposing conversion charges for land use, based on the date of the application and the enactment of the ....
existence of an alternative remedy whether adequate or not, does not alter the fundamentally discretionary nature of the High Court’s writ jurisdiction and, therefore, does not create an absolute bar....
Misuse charges levied by authority are unsustainable when not timely addressed, and delay in processing applications cannot be penalized against the petitioner.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the provisions of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, particularly Section 63, Section 65, and Section 65A, to....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner is not liable to pay the one-time premium for change of user and penalty as demanded by the impugned notice, and the applicatio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the fulfillment of conditions for transfer and conversion under the relevant provisions of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 and....
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
