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

1995 Supreme(Guj) 336

B.N.KIRPAL, H.L.GOKHALE
GEETABEN JANAKBHAI PATEL – Appellant
Versus
COMPETENT AUTHORITY and ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: Amar N.Bhatt

B. N. KIRPAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of the learned single Judge, who dismissed the writ petition of the appellant, challenging the order of the Competent Authority under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, who had held that he had no jurisdiction to review an earlier order.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are that the appellant had purchased land, measuring 1600. 34 sq. metres, part of which was leased and part of which was sold, to two different persons. The requisite forms under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) act, 1976 were filled by the appellant in 1976 and after some protracted proceedings, the Competent Officer, by an order dated 3rd October, 1987/11th November, 1987, declared 503. 28 sq. metres as surplus land.

( 3 ) AN appeal was filed before the Urban Land Tribunal, who confirmed the said order. Thereafter, on 29th November, 1990, notification under Sec. 10 (3) of the U. L. C. Act, was passed. A notice was issued, requiring the appellant, to hand over all the surplus land.

( 4 ) THE appellant received a letter dated 2nd of April, 1991, whereby the Town development Officer informed that construction on land coul









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