Search Results for "rehabilitation"

1036 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1036 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition for Notice Under Section 16(2)(a) of Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999. Court directs respondents to issue notice to project affected persons before denying rehabilitation benefits.

The petitioners, legal heirs of a deceased project affected person, filed a writ petition seeking directions to the respondents to issue a notice unde...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Allows Petition Challenging Demolition of Residential Structures Without Notice Under Gujarat Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 2012. Demolition Without Prior Notice and Hearing Violates Principles of Natural Justice and Article 300A of the Constitution.

The petitioners, Kureshi Irfanbhai Mohammadsharifbhai and others, filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India bef...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Writ Petitions Seeking Compliance with BIFR Rehabilitation Scheme and Quashes Pre-deposit Order in Customs Dispute. Merger of Sick Company with Petitioner Under SICA Extinguishes Pre-deposit Liability, and Revenue Authorities Are Bound by the BIFR Scheme.

The petitioner, SMS Lifesciences India Limited, filed two writ petitions. The first sought a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 (Director G...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Writ Petitions Seeking Compliance with BIFR Rehabilitation Scheme and Waiver of Pre-Deposit in Customs Dispute. BIFR Scheme Binding on Government Departments; Pre-Deposit Condition Quashed for Sick Industrial Company Under Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944.

The petitioner, SMS Lifesciences India Limited, filed two writ petitions. The first sought a mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 (Director General o...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Land Acquisition Under Slum Act for Non-Compliance with Section 14(1) — Acquisition of Petitioner's Land by Deputy Collector Set Aside for Failure to Follow Mandatory Procedure Under Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971.

The petitioner, NESCO Limited, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the acquisition of its land bearing CT...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition to Quash Land Acquisition Proceedings Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Due to Lapse Under Section 24(2) of 2013 Act. Acquisition Lapsed as Possession Not Taken and Compensation Not Paid Despite Award Made in 2008.

The petitioners, Reliance Natural Resources Limited and its director Murli Manohar Purohit, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitutio...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Petitions Declaring Lapse of Land Acquisition Under Section 24(2) of RFCTLARR Act, 2013. Acquisition for Karwar Port Lapsed Due to Non-Payment of Compensation and Non-Taking of Possession.

The petitioners, fishermen residing in Goudawada, Baitkhol, Karwar, Uttara Kannada, filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitutio...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of Lease Claimants in Slum Rehabilitation Dispute — Welfare Legislation Overrides Equitable Rights. High Court's Order Setting Aside HPC Decision and Allowing Redevelopment Upheld as Slum Act Takes Precedence Over Prospective Lessees' Claims.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal arising from a slum rehabilitation dispute in Mumbai. The appellants, legal representatives of Lullu Vas, claim...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitioners' Challenge to Land Acquisition for MIHAN Project — Upholds Validity of Notifications Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Court holds that substantial compliance with Section 4(1) and Section 6 is sufficient and challenge after award is barred by delay and laches.

The petitioners, Bhawarlal Shankarlal Sarda and Lasmikant Shankarlal Sarda, filed two writ petitions challenging the land acquisition proceedings init...