Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE
Hon’ble Lieutenant Governor – Appellant
Versus
Smartspace Infrastructure Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.
1. The present appeals have been preferred by the Andaman & Nicobar Administration against the common judgement and order dated January 11, 2023 passed in WPA No. 43 of 2019 (Smartspace Infrastructure Private Limited vs. Union of India), WPA No. 56 of 2019 (Jogeshwar Nath Arora vs. The Lieutenant Governor), WPA No. 45 of 2019 ( Girish Arora vs, Lieutenant Governor), WPA No. 6016 of 2020 (Smartspace Infrastructure Private Limited vs. Union of India and others), WPA No. 187 of 2021 (Smartspace Infrastructure Private Limited vs. Union of India and others) and WPA No. 6019 of 2020 (Smartspace Infrastructure Private Limited vs. Union of India and others).
2. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petitions, holding that the amended sub Clause (2) & (3) of Rule 4 (A) of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Rules, 1968 published vide Notification dated January 17, 2018 are struck down as ultra vires of Section 40 (2) of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulations, 1966 as well as of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Simultaneously, the Notification dated January 17, 201
The amended sub-rules (2) & (3) of Rule 4(A) of the A & N Land Revenue and Land Reforms Rules, 1968 were found to be ultra vires of the A & N Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966 and to vio....
Notification permitting 75% TDR utilisation via premium payment upheld; complies with MRTP Act procedure, within rule-making powers under Section 22(m), not ultra vires or manifestly arbitrary, addre....
The State Government does not have the power to review its own orders unless such power is specifically conferred by statute. The State Government cannot exercise its power of review after a long del....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Deputy Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to pass orders for recovery of possession under Regulation 1966, and the recovery of possession wa....
The Deputy Collector's notice issued beyond the one-year limit for calling records under the Tenancy Act was void, emphasizing the necessity of application of mind in such proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the exemption granted for the removal of ordinary earth for linear projects was found to be arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Const....
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Ravish Agrawal, Sanjay Agrawal For the Respondent : Pushpendra Yadav, R. N. Singh, Akshay Pawar
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
