Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 39 (0.50 seconds)Section 48 in Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 [Entire Act]
Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971
Section 2 in The Advocates Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 56 in Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 [Entire Act]
The Advocates Act, 1961
Section 56 in The Advocates Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966
S.P. Gupta vs Union Of India & Anr on 30 December, 1981
In fact
public spirited citizens having faith in rule
of law are rendering great social and legal
http://www.judis.nic.in
63
service by espousing cause of public
nature. They cannot be ignored or
overlooked on technical or conservative
yardstick of the rule of locus standi or
absence of personal loss or injury. Present
day development of this branch of
jurisprudence is towards freer movement
both in nature of litigation and approach
of the courts. Residents of locality seeking
protection and maintenance of
environment of their locality cannot be
said to be busy bodies or interlopers S.P.
Gupta v. Union of India, [1982] 2 SCR
985--AIR 1982 SC 149; Akhil Bhartiya
Soshit Kararnchari Sangh v. U.O.I., [1981]
1 SCC 246--AIR 1981 SC 293 and Fertilizer
Corporation Karngar Union v.U.O.I., AIR
1981 SC 364. Even otherwise physical or
personal or economic injury may give rise
to civil or criminal action but violation of
rule of law either by ignoring or affronting
individual or action of the executive in
disregard of the provisions of law raises
substantial issue of accountability of
those entrusted with responsibility of the
administration. It furnishes enough cause
of action either for individual or
community in general to approach by way
http://www.judis.nic.in
64
of writ petition and the authorities cannot
be permitted to seek shelter under cover
of technicalities of locus standi nor they
can be heard to plead for restraint in
exercise of discretion as grave issues of
public concern outweigh such
considerations.”
Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari ... vs Union Of India And Ors on 14 November, 1980
In fact
public spirited citizens having faith in rule
of law are rendering great social and legal
http://www.judis.nic.in
63
service by espousing cause of public
nature. They cannot be ignored or
overlooked on technical or conservative
yardstick of the rule of locus standi or
absence of personal loss or injury. Present
day development of this branch of
jurisprudence is towards freer movement
both in nature of litigation and approach
of the courts. Residents of locality seeking
protection and maintenance of
environment of their locality cannot be
said to be busy bodies or interlopers S.P.
Gupta v. Union of India, [1982] 2 SCR
985--AIR 1982 SC 149; Akhil Bhartiya
Soshit Kararnchari Sangh v. U.O.I., [1981]
1 SCC 246--AIR 1981 SC 293 and Fertilizer
Corporation Karngar Union v.U.O.I., AIR
1981 SC 364. Even otherwise physical or
personal or economic injury may give rise
to civil or criminal action but violation of
rule of law either by ignoring or affronting
individual or action of the executive in
disregard of the provisions of law raises
substantial issue of accountability of
those entrusted with responsibility of the
administration. It furnishes enough cause
of action either for individual or
community in general to approach by way
http://www.judis.nic.in
64
of writ petition and the authorities cannot
be permitted to seek shelter under cover
of technicalities of locus standi nor they
can be heard to plead for restraint in
exercise of discretion as grave issues of
public concern outweigh such
considerations.”