REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Jagnnath Hanumant Sonawane Appellant

V/S

SLUM REHABILITATION AUTHORITY Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

RIDGE VS. BALDWIN [REFERRED]
CALVIN VS. CARR [REFERRED]
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE VS. J V BHAT [REFERRED]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER BOMBAY VS. P S MALVENKAR [REFERRED]
TULSIPUR SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED VS. NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE TULSIPUR [REFERRED]
SWADESHI COTTON MILLS NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION UNION OF INDIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
SACHIDANAND PANDEY VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. CYNAMIDE INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED]
SITARAM SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED U P STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
SCHEDULED CASTE AND WEAKER SECTION WELFARE ASSOCIATION REGD VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED]
C B GAUTAM VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY VS. MANSOOR ALI KHAN [REFERRED]
INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS I VS. INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL WELFARE [REFERRED]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. BASANT NAHATA [REFERRED]
ROOP SINGH NEGI VS. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK [REFERRED]
UNITED BANK OF INDIA VS. SATYAWATI TONDON [REFERRED]
RASILA S MEHTA VS. CUSTODIAN NARIMAN BHAVAN [REFERRED]
CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES DEFENCE VS. COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL OFFICER MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF HYDERABAD [REFERRED]
PONKUNNAM TRADERS VS. ADDITIONAL INCOME TAX OFFICER [REFERRED]
PAPAYA CHINAYA MUTHWAS VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED]
IMAM MIRASAHEB NADAF VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED]
DEVENDRA GANPATLAL CHAMEDIA VS. CHIEF OFFICER AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY [REFERRED]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Respective Counsel waive service. By consent and at their request the petition is heard finally at the admission stage.

(2.) By the above petition, the Petitioners have impugned the order dated 7th December, 2011, in Appeal No. 14 of 2011 passed by Respondent No.5 - President, Special Tribunal constituted under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the Slum Act"), confirming the order dated 11th April 2011 corrected to 4th May 2011 (by corrigendum) passed by Respondent No. 2-Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), declaring the subject property as 'Slum Rehabilitation Area' under Section 3C(1) of the Slum Act.

(3.) The principal ground of challenge is that the order dated 11th April 2011 corrected to 4th May, 2011 (by corrigendum) declaring the subject property as 'Slum Rehabilitation Area' under section 3C(1) of the Slum Act is passed without issuing a Show Cause Notice and granting an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners thereby violating the principles of natural justice. Consequently, it is contended that the said order is required to be set aside.

Click here to view full judgment.

JAGNNATH HANUMANT SONAWANE Vs. SLUM REHABILITATION AUTHORITY

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address