Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (1.81 seconds)
High Court On Its Own Motion vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 8 May, 2026 cites

Ajay Maken vs Union Of India on 13 July, 2015

She would also refer to the decision in Ajay Maken vs. Union of India19 where the Delhi High Court referring to the decision of Sudama Singh (supra) held that forced eviction of settlement dwellers is illegal if carried out without due compliance with the principles of natural justice to include adequate notice and the duty of the State to ensure adequate rehabilitation plans are in place.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 1 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Kolkata Municipal Corporation vs Bimal Kumar Shah on 8 October, 2021

264. A two-Judge Bench of this Court in Kolkata Municipal Corporation & v. Bimal Kumar Shah, speaking through Justice PS Narasimha, had occasion to discuss the scope and content of Article 300-A and the constitutional vision in relation to private property. This Court held that merely providing compensation does not justify compulsory acquisition by the state unless procedural safeguards are followed. It was observed that a "post-colonial reading" of the constitutional right to property cannot be limited to the twin conditions of (a) the acquisition being for a public purpose; and (b) payment of compensation, and must give way to morel meaningful renditions This Court observed:
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rameshkumar Madanlal Sahu vs High Power Committee on 29 October, 2018

12.1. A "Dwelling House" is defined in Section 3X (a) of the Slum Act. Only ground floor structures are considered as dwelling Page 191 of 264 P. V. Rane ::: Uploaded on - 08/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 09/05/2026 11:41:27 ::: SMWP1_2024.DOC structures. A challenge was made to the policy of the State Government which recognized only ground floor structure as a dwelling house. An assertion was made that even the mezzanine and first floor should be treated as a part of the dwelling structure for the purposes of rehabilitation. This contention was rejected by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pameshkumar Nandlal Sahu v. High Powered Committee & Ors. - WP No. 3075 of 2015 and Gopal Chinmaya Shetty vs. State of Maharashtra - PIL (L) No. 31310 of 2021.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1