<?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>1985 (4) TMI 319 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169689</link>
    <description>A statutory summary eviction power under town planning law is not unconstitutional merely because the scheme provides no appeal or revision. Its validity depends on the cumulative effect of the statutory framework, the nature of the authority exercising it, and the safeguards built into the process. The power is treated as quasi-judicial, so notice, hearing, and a speaking order based only on relevant material are required. The action also remains open to writ review for mala fides, perversity, or other legal infirmities. On that basis, the absence of corrective machinery did not invalidate the provision, and the challenge to the eviction notices failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2015 18:06:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383461" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (4) TMI 319 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169689</link>
      <description>A statutory summary eviction power under town planning law is not unconstitutional merely because the scheme provides no appeal or revision. Its validity depends on the cumulative effect of the statutory framework, the nature of the authority exercising it, and the safeguards built into the process. The power is treated as quasi-judicial, so notice, hearing, and a speaking order based only on relevant material are required. The action also remains open to writ review for mala fides, perversity, or other legal infirmities. On that basis, the absence of corrective machinery did not invalidate the provision, and the challenge to the eviction notices failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169689</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>