Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (1.01 seconds)

Gurbinder Kaur Brar And Anr vs Uoi And Ors on 22 July, 2013

33. To our mind, though in Surinder Singh Brars' case, the issue was mainly that procedure had not been followed so as to benefit some private interest of building/construction companies, however, the law laid down in that case, as also reiterated in Gurbinder Kaur Brars' case, as seen VIKAS CHANDER 2014.09.05 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.9638 of 2005 -14- above, is that it is the Administrator of the Union Territory of Chandigarh, alone, who is the Competent Authority to sanction acquisition proceedings in respect of any land sought to be compulsorily acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and that such authority cannot be delegated to the Advisor to the Administrator.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 11 - G S Singhvi - Full Document

Gulabrao Keshavrao Patil & Ors vs State Of Gujarat & Ors on 1 December, 1995

24. Addressing arguments, shri Arun Jain, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, basically reiterated all that we have reproduced above from the pleadings, and further relied upon the under given three judgments of the Supreme Court, to submit that the acquisition process itself was bad, not having been sanctioned by a competent authority. The judgements relied upon by him are Gulabrao Keshavrao Patil and others v. State of Gujarat and others(1996) 2 SCC 26, Surinder Singh Brar and others v. Union of India and others (2013) 1 SCC 403 and Gurbinder Kaur Brar and another v. Union of India and others (2013) 11 SCC 228.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 28 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document
1