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

2004 Supreme(Jhk) 148

P.K.BALASUBRAMANYAN, AMARESHWAR SAHAY
Birla Institute Of Technology – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent


ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel on both sides.

2. These appeals came up for admission and on consent are taken up for final disposal together.

3. The petitioners in W.P. (C) No. 2958 of 2003 and W.P (C) No. 3325 of 2003 respectively are the appellants in these appeals. They filed statements under Section 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. On the scheme of the Act, the statements filed under Section 6 have to be inquired into by the competent authority by preparing a draft statement in terms of Section 8 of the Act. Thereafter, considering the objections, if any, a final statement in terms of Section 9 had to be prepared by the competent authority. By passing such an order, the authority determines the land held in excess of the ceiling area by a statement given and becomes entitled to take possession of such excess land in terms of the Act. A person aggrieved by the final statement prepared under Section 9 of the Act, has a right of appeal, either under Section 12 of the Act before the Urban Land Tribunal of under Section 33 of the Act, depending on the nature of the order passed by the competent authority. In case of an order under Section 12 of the Act, the perso





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