Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
N. J. Jamadar, J
N. D. Bhuta Charities – Appellant
Versus
Apex Grievance Redressal Committee – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. historical context and procedural history of property ownership and slum scheme applications. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. conflicting arguments regarding procedural validity, consent requirements, and locus standi. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 3. determination of factual validity of project status and ownership records. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 4. evaluation of administrative error in agrc's refusal reasoning. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 5. impermissibility of progressively curing fundamentally deficient project applications. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53) |
| 6. recognizing the landowner's primary preferential right to redevelop slum areas. (Para 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67) |
| 7. statutory necessity of a formal 3c(1) declaration for valid project commencement. (Para 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73) |
| 8. liberty granted for fresh proposal submission based on current statutory declarations. (Para 74 , 75) |
JUDGMENT:-
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and, with the consent of the learned Counsel for
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
