Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.25 seconds)
Bina Mathew vs State Of Kerala on 28 May, 2025 cites

Jal Mahal Resorts P.Ltd vs K.P.Sharma & Ors on 25 April, 2014

34. The stand of respondent No.3 with regard to the coverage of the area under CRZ Notification i.e., Coastal Regulation Zone Notification 2011 would have no force for the reason that it came into force only with effect from 06.01.2011 and will not be applicable to any valid permit issued like the one in the present case, which was issued in 28.12.2010. Intriguingly Paragraph 3 of the aforementioned letter also empowers the issuance of a guidelines for declaring the Critically Vulnerable Coastal Area (CVCA). The CVCA had been WA NO. 1944 OF 2023 36 2025:KER:38575 also a matter of ponderance in the judgment cited by respondent No.3 in Kapico Kerala Resorts Private Limited (Supra) wherein in Paragraph 39, the Supreme Court had an occasion to draw a distinction between the areas to be declared as CVCA in CRZ Notification 2011 viz-a-viz 2019 notification. The same reads as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 28 - Cited by 60 - G S Misra - Full Document

M.K. Balakrishnan & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 26 March, 2009

In support of the aforesaid, relied upon paragraph 23 of the interim order of the Supreme Court in Balakrishnan M. K. and Others v. Union of India and Others [2017 KHC 4450] : [(2017) 7 SCC 805] to contend that already an exercise has been undertaken by mapping 2,01,503 wetlands by the Union of India in compliance with the provisions of Rule 4 of the Wetland Rules 2010 and further exercise has been undertaken and noticed by the Supreme Court. The aforementioned order has also been addressed to the High Court of Kerala and there is one Public Interest Litigation pending. He also relied upon the ratio to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kapico Kerala Resorts Private Limited v.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 78 - Full Document

Gulf Goans Hotels Co. Ltd. & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 22 September, 2014

In support of the contention, also relied upon the ratio decidendi culled out in the judgment reported in Gulf Goans Hotels Company Limited and Another v. Union of India and Others [(2014) 10 SCC 673] to contend that convention as per the promulgation of the Rules cannot be treated to be a magna carta until and unless the exercise as required under the Rules is undertaken. In support of the contention, relied upon paragraphs 22, 25 and 26 of the aforesaid judgment which read as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 76 - R Gogoi - Full Document
1   2 Next