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

1995 Supreme(Guj) 402

A.N.DIVECHA
KARIMBHAI KALUBHAI BELIM – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: A.J.PATEL, D.N.Patel

A. N. DIVECHA, J.

( 1 ) THE order passed by the District Development Officer at Vadodara (respondent No. 2 herein) on 29th November 1986 as also on 1st december 1986 as affirmed in revision by the order passed by and on behalf of the State of Gujarat (respondent No. 1 herein) on 19th June 1987 is under challenge in this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India. By his impugned order of 29th November 1986, respondent No. 2 rejected the application for regularisation of construction and by his order of 1st Decembr 1986, respondent No. 2 directed the petitioners not to proceed with any construction activity on the land involved in this petition.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this petition move in a narrow compass. The dispute centres round one parcel of land bearing Survey No. 374/2a admeasuring 1,387 square metres situated at Tarsali in District Vadodara (the disputed land for convenience ). The petitioners were permitted to retain it in the inquiry under the urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. It appears that they obtained the development permission from the Baroda Urban Development Authority by one order passed on 19th April 1986. Its copy is at Annexure A to







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