https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157720 Rule 3(b) of the Madras Land Acquisition Rules and the corresponding Mysore rule were treated as mandatory and intra vires because Section 5A inquiry is quasi-judicial and the departmental notice requirement ensures all relevant material is before the Collector and Government. Omission to notify the requisitioning department therefore vitiated the Section 5A proceedings and the consequential Section 6 decision. A belated challenge to the Section 4 notification was rejected, and the delay in forwarding the Section 5A report did not justify broader invalidation. The Section 4 notification was sustained, the Section 6 notification and defect-based proceedings were quashed, and the matter was remitted for a fresh Section 5A inquiry after notice to the requisitioning department. en-us Thu, 21 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Aug 2014 08:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157720 Rule 3(b) of the Madras Land Acquisition Rules and the corresponding Mysore rule were treated as mandatory and intra vires because Section 5A inquiry is quasi-judicial and the departmental notice requirement ensures all relevant material is before the Collector and Government. Omission to notify the requisitioning department therefore vitiated the Section 5A proceedings and the consequential Section 6 decision. A belated challenge to the Section 4 notification was rejected, and the delay in forwarding the Section 5A report did not justify broader invalidation. The Section 4 notification was sustained, the Section 6 notification and defect-based proceedings were quashed, and the matter was remitted for a fresh Section 5A inquiry after notice to the requisitioning department. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 21 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157720