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

1979 Supreme(Guj) 202

N.H.BHATT
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, RAJKOT – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: J.H.PATEL, M.B.SHAH, P.M.RAVAL

N. H. BHATT, J.

( 1 ) * * * *

( 2 ) AFTER going through the orders passed by the Collector and the Deputy Secretary certain errors of law are detected as apparent on the face of the record. Neither the Collector nor the Deputy Secretary kept himself confined to his statutory powers under sec. 258 (1) of the Municipalities Act nor does it appear that the requirement of that section were taken into account by the authorities concerned. It is too late in the day for me to emphasise that all public bodies and officials have got only those powers which are expressly or by a necessary implication granted by law and to other unlike citizens who can do everything except that which is prohibited by law. When the Collector and the Deputy Secretary of the Government exercising appellate powers under sec. 285 (3) (of Gujarat Municipalities Act) lost sight of the morning of sec. 285 (1) their order is to be held as the one passed without authority of law. Sec. 958 (1) of the Gujarat Municipalities Act gives powers to the Collector to suspend the execution or prohibiting the doing of any act and direct the municipality to restore the position as it was before the commencement of the work if the wo



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