https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181869 Failure to give local public notice of the substance of a Section 4(1) acquisition notification was treated as a mandatory defect, not a mere irregularity, and it vitiated the acquisition because the statutory notice scheme required both Gazette publication and locality notice. The fact that objections were filed did not cure the omission. The acquisition was also held vulnerable as a colourable exercise of power: the stated public purpose was found to be illusory, and the power was used for an extraneous object, amounting to legal mala fides without requiring proof of personal ill-will. On both grounds, the acquisition was invalid. en-us Mon, 29 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Jul 2017 14:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181869 Failure to give local public notice of the substance of a Section 4(1) acquisition notification was treated as a mandatory defect, not a mere irregularity, and it vitiated the acquisition because the statutory notice scheme required both Gazette publication and locality notice. The fact that objections were filed did not cure the omission. The acquisition was also held vulnerable as a colourable exercise of power: the stated public purpose was found to be illusory, and the power was used for an extraneous object, amounting to legal mala fides without requiring proof of personal ill-will. On both grounds, the acquisition was invalid. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 29 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181869