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

1970 Supreme(Del) 7

S.RANGARAJAN, H.R.KHANNA
MANOHAR LAL – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.L.JOSHI, D.D.Choudhury, HARDEV SINGH, R.V.S.Mani

H. B. KHANNA

( 1 ) THE petitioner, a resident of Bhiwani, Hissar District in the State of Haryana, has sought the following reliefs:

1. That Section 4 and sub-section (b) (ii) of Section 7 and Sections 78, 79 and 80 of the Punjab Reorganization Act 1966 bo declared as ultra vires and void.

( 2 ) THAT a suitable writ, order or direction may be issued to implement the Shah Commission Report in toto and that Chandigarh Capital Project as also Lalroo, Darabassi, Pathankot and areas of Fazilka and Malaut be declared as included in the territories of the Haryana State; and

( 3 ) THAT a suitable writ be issued ousting the authority of the Central Government from the control and management of the Bhakra Nangal complex and to vest the same in the State of Haryana in order that people of Haryana may have full share in the water of Satluj, Beas and Ravi rivers.

1. The Union of India and the State of Punjab, but not the State of Haryana, have filed returns contesting this petition. The two questions argued before us relate to (1) the validity of the relevant sections of the Punjab Reorganisation Act and (2) the enforceability by this Court of the Shah Commission Report.

( 4 ) SO far as the first

























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