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

1964 Supreme(All) 142

M. C. DESAI, R. S. PATHAK
Habib Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
H. C. Sharma, for Petitioner.

Judgement

DESAI, C.J. : This is an appeal from an order of our brother Dwivedi refusing to quash by certiorari a notification issued under Section 4 and a declaration made under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. It is not alleged in the petition that there was any detect in either of them. The notification issued under Section 4 had to be published in the official gazette and was admittedly so published. The Collector also had to give public notice of its substance at convenient places in the locality and it is not alleged that he did not do so. The notification mentioned that certain land was acquired for a public purpose The statement in the notification that it was repaired for a public purpose was conclusive and could not be challenged even on the ground of mala fide. There was therefore, nothing Illegal or defective in the notification issued under S. 4 and no case was made out for its being quashed.

2. It was contended before us that the Collector did not comply with the direction contained to paragraph 415 of the Revenue Manual which requires the Collector to serve upon every person interested in the land a notice containing the substance of the notification. This rule ha




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