A. J. SHASTRI
Krupeshbhai N. Patel – Appellant
Versus
Vadodara Urban Development Authority – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. By way of this petition under Article 226 and Article 300A read with Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction
(i) to declare that the respondent authority - VUDA is legally not entitled and justified in demanding betterment charges, incremental charges, contribution charges etc., at the time of preparing and sanctioning the draft Town Planning Scheme and they cannot raise the demand of the said amount or the charges till the State Government under Section 65 of the Act:
(ii) to permanently restrain the respondent authority from depositing and encashing 12 monthly post-dated cheques & 12 undated blank cheques for interest handed over by the petitioner for total amount o Rs.18,25,05,245/- and also may be pleased to quash and set aside the action of the respondent authority in raising demand of Rs.18,25,05,245/-;
(iii) to declare that the demand of 12 post dated cheques and 12 undated blank cheques for the amount of interest by the respondent au
Babulal Badriprasad Varma v. Surat Municipal Corporation reported in 2008 (3) GLH 137
Pravesh Kumar Sachdeva Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2018) 10 SCC 628
Union of India Vs. Susaka Private Limited and others reported in (2018) 2 SCC 182
Prestige Lights Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India reported in (2007) 8 SCC 449
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.