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

2007 Supreme(Guj) 85

JAYANT PATEL
TRIBHOVANDAS. A. SINGHVI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: H.S.MUNSHAW, Y.S.MANKAD

( 1 ) THE short facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is holding the agricultural land bearing Survey No. 138 was served with the notice by the DDO dated 14. 12. 1993, whereby he was called upon to show cause as to why the maximum fine should not be imposed for un-authorised excavation of morum from the agricultural land and thereby consequential breach of the provisions of the Bombay Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to as ?the Code? ). The petitioner submitted reply to the show-cause notice on 4. 1. 1994 and contended, inter alia, that they are having two quarries for salt in the nearby area and, therefore, for laying down morum on the road for those factory of the salt, the morum was used. It was also stated that the petitioner has also not engaged in any construction activity or construction of dam. If anybody else has excavated morum from the agricultural land they were not aware of that. The District Collector ultimately on 25. 5. 1994 passed the order, observing that thee is un-authorised excavation and the TDO has recommended imposition of fine of 40 times revenue, therefore, he has imposed the fine of 40 times revenue and for the whole, the total calculation











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