https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286717 The court allowed the appeals, quashing proceedings under Section 36 and actions taken pursuant to the Director of Consolidation of Holdings' orders. Emphasizing adherence to natural justice principles, it interpreted Section 36 powers to be exercised within a reasonable timeframe during consolidation proceedings, not after finalizing new record of rights. The court held that Section 36, despite concerns of violating constitutional rights, was protected by Article 31A regarding agrarian reform laws, thus not unconstitutional. The importance of the audi alteram partem rule in quasi-judicial proceedings was underscored, requiring notice and opportunity to be heard for affected parties. en-us Fri, 04 Jan 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:39:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286717 The court allowed the appeals, quashing proceedings under Section 36 and actions taken pursuant to the Director of Consolidation of Holdings' orders. Emphasizing adherence to natural justice principles, it interpreted Section 36 powers to be exercised within a reasonable timeframe during consolidation proceedings, not after finalizing new record of rights. The court held that Section 36, despite concerns of violating constitutional rights, was protected by Article 31A regarding agrarian reform laws, thus not unconstitutional. The importance of the audi alteram partem rule in quasi-judicial proceedings was underscored, requiring notice and opportunity to be heard for affected parties. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 Jan 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286717