Search Results for "sand excavation"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Review Petition in Partition Suit Impleadment...
Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witn...

Search Results for "sand excavation"

63 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 63 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Penalty for Excavation of Ordinary Earth Without Authorization Under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code — Petitioner Had Valid Development Permission and No Mining Intent. Excavation of ordinary earth as part of construction project does not attract royalty or penalty under Section 48(7) of MLRC if done under valid development permission.

8 Mar 2024

The petitioner, AIGP Developers (Pune) Private Limited, challenged an order dated 29 June 2023 passed by the Tehsildar, Haveli (Pune), under Section 4...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Proportionate Refund for Unextracted Sand Due to Flooding as Natural Calamity. Contractor Entitled to Refund for Sand Not Extracted Due to Stay Order and River Flooding, Treating Flooding as Natural Calamity.

19 Aug 2022

The petitioner, Kiran S/o Chandrakant Maid, a civil contractor, participated in an e-tender process initiated by the Collector, Jalgaon, and was award...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Tahsildar's Demand for Royalty on Excavated Material During Construction. Held that Tahsildar lacks jurisdiction to levy royalty on material excavated pursuant to valid development permission under MRTP Act and NA permission under MLR Code.

9 Dec 2021

The petitioner, originally Flagship Infrastructure Pvt Ltd and now Paranjape Schemes (Construction) Limited, filed a writ petition challenging a show ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Quashing Tahsildar's Order Levying Royalty on Excavated Material for Construction. Section 48 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 Does Not Empower Tahsildar to Levy Royalty on Material Excavated for Building Foundation or Plinth.

9 Dec 2021

The petitioner, P.S.C. Pacific, a registered partnership firm, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated 11/8/2010...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds FIRs for Illegal Mining Despite Compounding Under MMDR Act — IPC Offences Are Distinct and Not Barred by Section 22 of MMDR Act. The court held that compounding under the MMDR Act does not bar prosecution under the IPC for theft and criminal misappropriation, as the offences are separate and distinct.

1 Sep 2020

The Supreme Court dismissed appeals by private appellants and the State of Madhya Pradesh against the High Court's refusal to quash FIRs for illegal m...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Under MPDA Act for Lack of Evidence of Public Order Disturbance. Sand Smuggling and Criminal Acts Do Not Automatically Justify Preventive Detention as They Pertain to Law and Order, Not Public Order.

3 Aug 2020

The petitioner, Baliram s/o Namdeo Bedke, challenged his preventive detention under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, B...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition for Release of Seized Sand in Excess of Transit Permit — Distinguishes Between Illegal Excavation and Excess Transport from Lawful Source. Section 48(7),(8) of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 not attracted when sand is from a lawful licensee, as State has no right over such sand.

15 Mar 2019

The petitioner, Harihar Puri, owned a truck (MH30AV1008) that was intercepted by the Tahsildar, Armori on 24 September 2018 while transporting sand. T...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Sand Mining Lease for Lack of Locus Standi and Failure to Show Public Injury. Lease Granted Under Maharashtra Minor Mineral Extraction Rules, 2013 Upheld as Valid.

12 Mar 2018

The petitioner, Prashant Patil, filed a Public Interest Litigation before the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) challenging the grant of a sand min...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitioners' Challenge to Cancellation of Sand Ghat Leases for Non-Deposit of Balance Amount. Failure to Deposit 75% of Bid Amount Within 30 Days as per Government Resolution dated 12.03.2013 Justifies Cancellation and Re-auction.

4 Sep 2014

The petitioners, seven individuals and firms, participated in an e-auction conducted on 07.12.2013 for the grant of leases of 73 sand ghats in Bhandar...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Sand Extraction Permits Granted Without Public Auction in Violation of Rule 39A of Bombay Minor Mineral Extraction Rules, 1955. Permits for Four Blocks in Dabhol Creek/Vashishtha River Set Aside Due to Failure to Follow Mandatory Auction Process Causing Loss to Public Exchequer.

19 May 2010

The petitioners, M/s. S.R. Shipping Co., a proprietary concern, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the d...

1 2 3 4

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)