https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190050 Section 4(c) of the Consolidation of Holdings & Prevention of Fragmentation Act was treated as conferring exclusive jurisdiction on consolidation authorities over covered land matters and as causing pending civil proceedings to abate. The constitutional challenge under Articles 14 and 19 failed because the issue was already covered by earlier Supreme Court decisions followed by the High Court. The provision was therefore not held unconstitutional, and the petitions were dismissed. en-us Thu, 31 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:13:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190050 Section 4(c) of the Consolidation of Holdings & Prevention of Fragmentation Act was treated as conferring exclusive jurisdiction on consolidation authorities over covered land matters and as causing pending civil proceedings to abate. The constitutional challenge under Articles 14 and 19 failed because the issue was already covered by earlier Supreme Court decisions followed by the High Court. The provision was therefore not held unconstitutional, and the petitions were dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 31 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190050