<?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>2014 (9) TMI 1216 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287594</link>
    <description>Executive coastal development guidelines and related administrative instructions bind citizens only when they have the form of law, contain a clear mandate, and are duly authenticated and made public in the manner required by Article 77. The Court found the pre-1991 materials relied on by the Union and the State were only opinions, suggestions, or administrative directions, lacking statutory source and proper promulgation, so they could not be enforced against the appellants. It also held that the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and the CRZ notification could not be applied retrospectively to justify demolition orders based on those earlier non-statutory guidelines.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2025 12:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=610821" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 1216 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287594</link>
      <description>Executive coastal development guidelines and related administrative instructions bind citizens only when they have the form of law, contain a clear mandate, and are duly authenticated and made public in the manner required by Article 77. The Court found the pre-1991 materials relied on by the Union and the State were only opinions, suggestions, or administrative directions, lacking statutory source and proper promulgation, so they could not be enforced against the appellants. It also held that the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and the CRZ notification could not be applied retrospectively to justify demolition orders based on those earlier non-statutory guidelines.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287594</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>