https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273577 The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, ruling that the rights of a quasi-permanent allottee did not amount to property under Articles 19(1)(f), 31(1), and 31(2) of the Constitution. The court held that the cancellation of the allotment by the Custodian did not violate the petitioners' fundamental rights as it was authorized by law. The judgment highlighted the temporary and subject-to-cancellation nature of the allotment, concluding that it did not confer ownership rights over the land. en-us Fri, 29 Mar 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Jul 2018 15:46:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273577 The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, ruling that the rights of a quasi-permanent allottee did not amount to property under Articles 19(1)(f), 31(1), and 31(2) of the Constitution. The court held that the cancellation of the allotment by the Custodian did not violate the petitioners' fundamental rights as it was authorized by law. The judgment highlighted the temporary and subject-to-cancellation nature of the allotment, concluding that it did not confer ownership rights over the land. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Mar 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273577