TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Invalid constitution of notified area under Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act; lack of public participation violates natural justice.</h1> <h3>Baldev Singh And Ors. Versus State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors.</h3> The Court found that the constitution of a notified area under Section 256 of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act, 1968 was invalid due to lack of proper ... - Issues Involved:The issues involved in this case are the constitution of a notified area under Section 256 of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act, 1968 without proper consideration of statutory conditions, denial of opportunity of being heard before the constitution of the notified area, and the applicability of natural justice principles in administrative decisions affecting civil consequences.Constitution of Notified Area:The appellants challenged the validity of the notification constituting a notified area under Section 256 of the Act, which included portions of four villages inhabited by agriculturists. The State Government decided to constitute the notified area despite initial reports against it, leading to the villagers losing their Gram Panchayat jurisdiction and facing higher tax burdens. The Court found that the decision lacked proper consideration of the statutory requirements for constituting a notified area, as outlined in Section 256 of the Act.Denial of Opportunity of Being Heard:The appellants raised the issue of denial of an opportunity to be heard before the constitution of the notified area, emphasizing the importance of natural justice principles in administrative decisions with civil consequences. Citing previous court decisions, the Court held that citizens affected by such decisions should have the right to be heard, even if the statute does not explicitly require it. The Court emphasized the democratic nature of society and the need for public participation in decisions affecting their way of life.Applicability of Natural Justice Principles:The Court highlighted the significance of natural justice principles in administrative decisions impacting citizens' rights and civil consequences. While the Himachal Act did not explicitly provide for a right of hearing, the Court held that natural justice should apply where administrative actions result in civil consequences. The Court ruled in favor of the appellants, quashing the notification constituting the notified area and directing the State Government to comply with the law and provide an opportunity for residents to be heard before making a fresh notification.This judgment underscores the importance of procedural fairness, public participation, and adherence to statutory requirements in administrative decisions affecting the rights and interests of citizens.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
