cites: 54857258

Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]

Constitution Article Cites 3 - Cited by 387520

Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing Act 1966

State of Karnataka - Act Cites 0 - Cited by 555

Mumbai Agricultural Produce Market ... vs Sharafatullah Hafiz Inayatulla & Anr on 15 February, 2000

160. The petitioner thus being not at all eligible even to make an application for such gala could not claim parity with other claimants and could not have claimed precedence over the other claimants on the ground that the petitioner had applied for allotment of such gala first and was thus eligible under the said term 'Early Bird Norms' suggested by the learned commissioner. In my view, the petitioner was not being similarly situated with the other claimants whose claims were considered by the respondent no.1, case of the petitioner could not have been considered by the respondent no.1 even under the said 'Early Bird Norms' suggested by the learned commissioner. The principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mumbai Agricultural Produce Market Committee & Anr. (supra) would squarely apply to the facts of this case.

Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Hanumant Murlidhar Gavade vs Mumbai Agricultural Produce Market & ... on 7 December, 2011

36. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the APMC thus itself having taken a stand that the respondent no.5 herein was not eligible for allotment of large Gala having not satisfied the norms suggested by the learned commissioner and this Court directing the APMC by an order dated 4 th March 2003 that as and when 12 more Galas were constructed by the APMC, the 3 applicants including the respondent no.5 should be considered in accordance with law and as per the guidelines laid down by the learned commissioner, the APMC has considered the application of the respondent no.5 illegally and allotted large Gala i.e.F-158 to the respondent no.5 contrary to the norms suggested by the learned commissioner and also contrary to the order dated 4 th March 2003 passed by the Division Bench of this Court and the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hanumant Murlidhar Gavade (supra).

Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 7 - R M Lodha - Full Document