<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1987 (1) TMI 483 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162036</link>
    <description>The SC held that publication of an approved Outline Development Plan and Zonal Regulations can be satisfied by a Gazette notice stating that the instrument is available for inspection, when the Act and Rules are read harmoniously as a single publication-and-inspection scheme. The regulations were treated as part of the integrated planning instrument, not as a separate document requiring detached publication. The Court further noted that any non-prejudicial defect in the mode of publication was protected by the validating clause, which cured mere omission, defect or irregularity where the public purpose had been served. The challenge to the licences and approval process therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346012" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (1) TMI 483 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162036</link>
      <description>The SC held that publication of an approved Outline Development Plan and Zonal Regulations can be satisfied by a Gazette notice stating that the instrument is available for inspection, when the Act and Rules are read harmoniously as a single publication-and-inspection scheme. The regulations were treated as part of the integrated planning instrument, not as a separate document requiring detached publication. The Court further noted that any non-prejudicial defect in the mode of publication was protected by the validating clause, which cured mere omission, defect or irregularity where the public purpose had been served. The challenge to the licences and approval process therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162036</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>