N.L.TIBREWAL, B.S.CHAUHAN
Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chittorgarh – Appellant
Versus
Mahaveer Oil Mill Chittorgarh – Respondent
(2). The respondent No1, carries-on the business of oil mill and admittedly his oil mill is situated within the market area notified under the provisions ofRajasthan Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961 hereinafter called `the Act, was served a show cause notice on 24.5.90 contained in Annex.1 to the writ petition to explain why he has not shifted to principal market yard inspite of the fact that he had been allotted a shop therein and if his explanation was not found satisfactory, why action should not be initiated against him and in the meanwhile, hislicence granted under Sec. 14 of the said Act was suspended for a period of
9. Tinsukhia Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. State of Assam and Others (1989(3) SCC 709)
10. Union of India vs. Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd. (1996(4) SCC 453)
11. State of U.P. and Ors. vs. Harish Kumar and Ors (1996(9) SCC 309).
1. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation vs. Balwant Regular Motor Service
2. R.N.Gosai vs. Yashpal Dhir (AIR 1993 SC 352)
3. Jan Mohd. Noor Mohd. Bagban vs. The State of Gujarat and Anr. (AIR 1966 SC 385)
5. Sreenivasa General Traders and Ors. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (AIR 1983 SC 1246)
12. A.P. Christian Medical Educational Society vs. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh (AIR 1986 SC 1490)
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.