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

1980 Supreme(MP) 103

G.P.SINGH, B.C.VARMA
MUNNAWAR AHMAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.D.Jain, S.L.SAXENA, Y.K.Munshi

G. P. SINGH, C. J.

( 1 ) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks quashing of an order dated 22nd September, 1979 passed by the Competent authority under Section 4 of the M. P. Lok Parisar (Bedakhali) Adhiniyam, 1974 as amended by the M. P. Lok Parisar (Bedakbali) Sanshodhan Adhiniyam, 1978 (No. 9 of 1978 ). The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the amendments introduced by the Amending Act No. 9 of 1978 are unconstitutional as they contravene Article 14 of the Constitution.

( 2 ) THE M. P. Lok Parisar (Bedakhali) Adhiniyam, 1974 is an Act to provide for the eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises and for certain incidental matters. Sections 4 and 5 of the Adhiniyam before the amendment by Act No. 9 of 1978 provided for issue of notice to the occupants to show cause against proposed order of eviction and for eviction after giving opportunity to the occupants of being heard and of producing evidence before the competent authority. The notice issued under Section 4 specified the grounds on which the order of eviction was proposed to be made and required all persons concerned to show cause against the









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