Search Results for "building plan sanction"

389 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 389 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Public Interest Litigation to Protect Land for Government Sports Complex at Navi Mumbai. CIDCO's commercial allotment of land earmarked for sports complex quashed; State Government's decision to shift complex to remote location set aside.

The Bombay High Court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation filed by the Indian Institute of Architects, Navi Mumbai Center, challenging the action...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Court Quashes State Decision to Shift Navi Mumbai Sports Complex, Reaffirms Public Interest. Judgment emphasizes the importance of accessible sports facilities, criticizes arbitrary land reallocation for commercial use, and mandates CIDCO to hand over land for the original sports complex.

The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by the Indian Institute of Architects, Navi Mumbai Center, challenges the allocation of land originally designate...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Upholds BBMP Circular Requiring NOC for Building Plan Sanction on Sites Formed Prior to 1965. Circular dated 29.02.2016 held valid under Section 321 of Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 and Article 300-A of Constitution of India.

The judgment concerns a batch of writ petitions challenging a circular dated 29.02.2016 issued by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). The c...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Land Acquisition for Garden and Playground in Development Plan. Land Reserved Under Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 Cannot Be Challenged on Grounds of Delay or Change of Purpose Once Acquisition Proceedings Are Initiated.

The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by Abhijit Chandrakant Chaunda and Chandrashekhar Mallikarjunappa Bidve challenging the acquisition of ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petitions Challenging Unilateral Modification of Development Control Regulations by State. Held that DCRs are statutory and cannot be altered without following due process under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966.

The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by D B Realty Limited and Salim Balwa (WP No.366 of 2014) and Savita Homemakers LLP and Akkshay Jain (W...