<?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>2007 (11) TMI 710 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312107</link>
    <description>Section 45-B of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act empowers reopening of concluded ceiling proceedings, but that power is quasi-judicial and cannot be exercised capriciously. Because reopening directly affects vested possession and rights flowing from final orders, persons in possession, including parcha holders, must receive prior notice and a fair opportunity to be heard before any fresh disposal is made. Mere awareness of interim status quo proceedings was insufficient. The impugned reopening and consequential orders were quashed for breach of natural justice, with fresh action left open only after hearing all affected parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2024 16:03:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=742118" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 710 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312107</link>
      <description>Section 45-B of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act empowers reopening of concluded ceiling proceedings, but that power is quasi-judicial and cannot be exercised capriciously. Because reopening directly affects vested possession and rights flowing from final orders, persons in possession, including parcha holders, must receive prior notice and a fair opportunity to be heard before any fresh disposal is made. Mere awareness of interim status quo proceedings was insufficient. The impugned reopening and consequential orders were quashed for breach of natural justice, with fresh action left open only after hearing all affected parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312107</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>