https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314409 A State policy requiring additional compensation from allottees was upheld as a lawful response to stalled development, farmer agitation and the need to resolve uncertainty affecting the project. The Court stated that judicial review of policy is limited: interference is warranted only if the decision is unconstitutional, contrary to statute, mala fide or manifestly arbitrary. Where the policy is supported by relevant material, consultations and public interest, courts do not substitute their own view for economic or administrative judgment. Private contractual arrangements and prior lease-related positions could not prevail over a later public-interest policy. en-us Thu, 19 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Jun 2024 20:09:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314409 A State policy requiring additional compensation from allottees was upheld as a lawful response to stalled development, farmer agitation and the need to resolve uncertainty affecting the project. The Court stated that judicial review of policy is limited: interference is warranted only if the decision is unconstitutional, contrary to statute, mala fide or manifestly arbitrary. Where the policy is supported by relevant material, consultations and public interest, courts do not substitute their own view for economic or administrative judgment. Private contractual arrangements and prior lease-related positions could not prevail over a later public-interest policy. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 19 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314409