Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The petitioner was aggrieved by the illegal and unconstitutional demolitions, contrary to the provisions of the GPMC Act, the Waqf Act, 1995 and the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
In the instant PIL where the central issue was regarding illegal mining in Digboi forest, the Court also took note of the fact that the illegal activities are also destroying heritage sites associated with Ahom dynasty.
The Delhi High Court held that places of worship could not encroach on public land and therefore, permitted demolition of parts of Mandir and Masjid to make pedestrian pathway uniform.
Delhi High Court: Expressing that, the mere fact that certain encroachments represent religious structure cannot possibly detract State from its obligation, Yashwant
Bombay High Court: While emphasizing the aspect of encroachment of public land, the Division Bench of Dipankar Datta, CJ and G.S. Kulkarni,
Supreme Court: In the case where two petitioners had encroached upon the Panchayat land and had constructed houses on it, the bench
Supreme Court: Dealing with the authority of the “Monitoring Committee to seal the residential premises on the private land” particularly when they
Madhya Pradesh High Court: G.S. Ahluwalia, J. dismissed a writ petition filed by the petitioners claiming that the Additional Director General of
Jharkhand High Court: Rajesh Shankar, J. quashed and set aside the impugned order issued by the Chairman of Lohardaga Municipality. The had
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Ajay Mohan Goel, J. entertained a writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, where
Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J. dismissed a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus against official respondents for
Rajasthan High Court: The Bench of Mohammad Rafiq and Goverdhan Bardhar, JJ. disposed of a petition with the direction to the petitioner
Madras High Court: A Bench of S.M. Subramaniam, J. while addressing a writ petition stated that “If a deity in a temple
Karnataka High Court: A Division bench comprising of Dinesh Maheswari and S.G. Pandit, JJ. while hearing a civil writ petition declined to
Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Rajiv Sharma, ACJ. and Lok Pal Singh, J., gave directions to the State Government against
Delhi High Court: The 2-Judge Bench comprising of S. Ravindra Bhat and S.P. Garg JJ., directed the constitution of an efficient cell
Supreme Court: Dealing with the matter where it was contended that a Sale Notification issued under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial
Supreme Court: Taking note of the very disturbing fact of encroachments on defence land, the Court said that the legislative policy and
Allahabad High Court: Deciding on the matter of whether construction of a religious structure (Temple) and attempting to encroach upon the public