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

1996 Supreme(Guj) 158

J.N.BHATT
VIJAYSINGH D. PARMAR – Appellant
Versus
COMPETENT AUTHORITY and ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: A.G.URAIZI, M.C.BHATT

J. N. BHATT, J.

( 1 ) WHETHER rejection of an application under Sec. 21 (1) of the urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 ("u. L. C. Act" for short) on the sole ground that the party has not produced evidence to show as to when the application under Sec. 20 of the U. L. C. Act was made, is legal and valid, is the central theme of the present petition.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is the owner and occupier of the lands bearing survey numbers 483, 403 and 475 situated in the sim of Gotri of district Vadodara. These agricultural lands totally admeasured about 4,094 sq. mts. which are hereinafter referred to as "the disputed lands". The petitioner had obtained exemption under Sec. 20 of the u. L. C. Act to carry out agricultural operations in the disputed lands. The authority had granted exemption to utilise the agricultural lands for agricultural purpose by an order dated 31-5-1979 under Sec. 20 of the U. L. C. Act. The said permission for exemption came to be cancelled by the respondent authority by passing an order dated 9-11-1990.

( 3 ) THE petitioner later on submitted an application under Sec. 21 of the U. L. C. Act to put up a scheme for accommodation for weaker section of the soc






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