<?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>1991 (4) TMI 451 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191915</link>
    <description>An association representing slum dwellers and a resident had locus standi to challenge State action affecting the occupants, because a bona fide public-spirited challenge on behalf of persons unable to approach the court themselves was maintainable. The Government&#039;s implied power to rescind notifications under the General Clauses Act had to be exercised consistently with the slum law&#039;s scheme, since declarations under the statute materially affected the inhabitants. Rescission without notice or hearing to the affected occupants violated audi alteram partem and was invalid, though fresh action after hearing them remained open.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 May 2017 18:28:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467367" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (4) TMI 451 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191915</link>
      <description>An association representing slum dwellers and a resident had locus standi to challenge State action affecting the occupants, because a bona fide public-spirited challenge on behalf of persons unable to approach the court themselves was maintainable. The Government&#039;s implied power to rescind notifications under the General Clauses Act had to be exercised consistently with the slum law&#039;s scheme, since declarations under the statute materially affected the inhabitants. Rescission without notice or hearing to the affected occupants violated audi alteram partem and was invalid, though fresh action after hearing them remained open.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191915</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>