9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (4) TMI 168X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ), were void as infringing the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and set aside a notice dated February 1, 1974 issued by the Deputy Municipal Commissioner under Section 299 of the Act against the First Respondent, intimating to him that he intended to take possession of unbuilt open land belonging to the First Respondent falling within the regular line of the street after the expiry of seven days from the service of the said notice. The learned Judge also issued a writ directing the Municipal Corporation to forbear from taking any action as threatened or otherwise in pursuance, enforcement or execution of the said notice. He further directed the Municipal Corporation to pay the costs of the Petition to the First Respondent. Both the Municipal Corporation and the State have filed appeals against this Judgment and order, the appeal filed by the Municipal Corporation being Appeal No. 51 of 1979 and the appeal filed by the State being Appeal No. 122 of 1979. As both these Appeals are directed against the same judgment, we are disposing them of by a common Judgment. 2. The First Respondent, his brother, the First Respondent's sons and his brother's sons are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the said Act. On Feb. 1, 1974 the Dy. Municipal Commissioner issued a notice under Section 299 of the Act to first respondent of his intention to take possession of that portion of his land, not occupied by a building, which lay within the revised regular line of the public street. The first respondent thereupon filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution on the Original Side of this High Court In the petition it was contended that Sections 297 to 301 of the Act were void as infringing Articles 14, 19(1)(f) and 31(2) of the Constitution. Though the impugned notice was issued by the Deputy Municipal Commissioner in exercise of the power in that behalf delegated to him by the Municipal Commissioner under Section 56 of the Act, surprisingly enough neither the Municipal Commissioner nor the Deputy Municipal Commissioner was made a party to the petition. This point was, however, not taken in the affidavit in reply nor was it argued at the hearing of the petition or before us in these Appeals, and we, therefore, do not propose to concern ourselves with it. The learned single Judge who heard the petition negatived the challenge under Articles 19(1)(f) and 31(2). He, however ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ferentia having a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved; and that the quantum of compensation and the procedure provided under Sections 297 to 301 were not discriminatory when compared to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. On the other hand, on behalf of the First Respondent it was contended that both sets of provisions dealt with the same matter and had the same object; that it was left to the Municipal Commissioner either to select one or the other as he pleased so that in the case of one owner whose land fell within the regular line of the street he could proceed under Sections 297 to 301 of the Act, while in the case of another owner whose land also fell within the regular line of the street he could proceed under Section 296. In the alternative it was submitted that assuming Sections 297 to 301 constituted an exception under Section 296, there was no valid basis for the classification sought to be made between one set of property owners and another and that the provisions of Sections 297 to 301 were highly prejudicial to a property owner as compared to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and were, therefore, discriminatory anil violative of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t." This is known as the rule of harmonious construction. 6. Bearing these rules of interpretation in mind we will now examine the relevant sections of the Act. The terms 'street' and 'public street' are defined in Clause (w) and (x) respectively of Section 3 of the Act. These definitions are as follows: "(w) 'street' includes any highway and any causeway, bridge, viaduct, arch, road, lane, footway, square, court, alley or passage whether a thoroughfare or not, over which the public have a right of passage or access or have passed and have access uninterruptedly for a period of 20 years; and, when there is a footway as well as carriage way to any street, the said term includes, both; (x) 'public street' means any street heretofore levelled, paved, metalled, channelled, severed or repaired by the Corporation and any street which becomes a public street under any of the provisions of this Act; or which vests in the Corporation as a public street": The subject of the "Regulation of Streets" is dealt with by Chap. XI of the Act. The first group of sections in that chapter, namely, from Sections 289 to 296, is headed "C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uire immovable property under Section 90 by agreement. In such a case the Municipal Commissioner is to make an application to the State Government, with the approval of the Improvements Committee and subject to the other provisions of the Act, to initiate proceedings for compulsory acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, and the State Government may thereupon in its discretion order proceedings to be taken for compulsory acquisition. Section 92 deals with the disposal of Municipal property and does not concern us in these Appeals. 7. The next group of sections in Chap. XI consists of Sections 297 to 301 and bears the heading "Preservation of Regular Line in Public Streets," Since it is the vires of this group of sections which was challenged in the petition filed by the first respondent, it is necessary to set them out in extenso omitting such portions thereof as are not material for our present purpose:-- "297. Prescribing the regular line of a street. (1) The Commissioner may - (a) prescribe a line on each side of any public street : XXXX (b) from time to time, but subject in each case to his receiving the authority of the Corporation in that behalf, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s such, in the Corporation. 299. Acquisition of open land or of land occupied by platforms, etc, within the regular line of a, street. (1) If any land not vesting fa the Corporation, whether open or enclosed, lies within the regular line of a public street, and is not occupied by a building, or if a platform, verandah, step or some other structure external to a building abutting on a public street, or a portion of a platform, verandah, step or other such structure, is within the regular line of such street the Commissioner may, after giving to the owner of the land or building not less than seven clear days' written notice of his intention so to do, take possession on behalf of the Corporation of the said land with its enclosing wall, hedge or fence, if any, or of the said platform, verandah, step or other such structure as aforesaid, or of the portion of the said platform, verandah, step or other such structure aforesaid which is within the regular line of the street, and, if necessary, clear the same and the land so acquired shall thenceforward be deemed a part of the public street. (2) xxxx 300. Setting forward of buildings to regular line of the street. (1) If any b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... treet or outside it. Under Clause (a), of Sub-section (1) of the said section acquisition of land and building has to be for the purpose of opening, widening, extending or otherwise improving any public street or of making any new public street. Clause (b) confers upon the Municipal Commissioner a further power, in addition to the land and buildings, acquired under Clause (a), to acquire all such land with the buildings, if any, standing thereon, as it shall seem expedient for the Municipal Corporation to acquire outside of the regular line, or of the intended regular line, of such street. The language in which Clause (b) is couched and the use of the phrase therein "acquire in addition to the said land and the buildings, if any, standing thereupon" and the use of the further phrase "to acquire outside of the regular line, or of the intended regular line, of such street" would show that the powers of the Municipal Commissioner to acquire land under Clause (a) and (b) of Section 298 of the Act are not confined merely to acquiring land and buildings falling outside the regular line of the street. 9. The question which falls to be considered is whether Sections 29 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. The matter is not left solely to the Municipal Commissioner. Whenever he gives such permission ,he has to report the matter to the Standing Committee, giving his reasons in writing. 10. When the regular line of the street is prescribed, whether for the first time or in substitution of the earlier line, any building or part of building standing thereon is left unaffected by the provisions of this group of sections. However, the moment a built-up portion becomes vacant, either by the owner desiring to rebuild or reconstruct his building or by the building collapsing or being burnt down, the prohibition against construction enacted under Section 297 (3) of the Act comes into play. This is achieved by the enactment of Section 298. Under that section if any part of a building abutting on a public street is within the regular line of such street and whenever the owner of such building desires to rebuild it or to take it down to an extent provided in Clause (a) of Section 298 (1) or to remove, reconstruct or make any addition to any portion of such building which is within the regular line of the street, the Municipal Commissioner may grant to the owner permission for the proposed wor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... falling within the regular line of the street Further, it can only be in respect of land which is not occupied by a building or which is occupied only by a compound wall or a platform, verandah, step or some other structure which is external to the building. Any other type of land or any building can only be acquired under Section 296 of the Act. Thus, the acquisition under Sections 298 and 299 is in respect of a particular kind of property only. These sections are thus particular enactments contained in the Act. If they are particular enactments, then on the rules of interpretation of statutes enunciated above, the general provisions contained in Section 296 of the Act and these particular provisions must be read harmoniously and the general provisions must be interpreted to affect only those types of properties which do not come under the particular provisions. These particular provisions thus constitute an exception to the general provisions enacted in Section 296 of the Act. If the Municipal Commissioner desires to acquire land which is not built upon or land from which the owner voluntarily wants to remove his building for the purpose of rebuilding or reconstruction or which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay Act 5 of 1905, Section 297 provided as follows: "297. (1) The Commissioner shall prescribe a line on each side of any public street, within which, except under the provisions of Section 310, no portion of any building abutting on the said street shall, after such line has been prescribed, be constructed (2) A line so prescribed shall be called 'the regular line of the street'." In Essa Jacob Hajee Jamal v. The Municipal Commissioner (1900) 2 Bom LR 810, a Division Bench of this High Court held that under Section 297 a regular line of a street can only be prescribed once and that it was not competent to the Municipal Commissioner to alter the line which was once prescribed; Apparently, as a result of this decision Section 297 as reproduced earlier came to be substituted for the original one. However, the heading to this group of sections continued to remain the same, namely, "Preservation of Regular Line in Public Streets". It was contended in The Municipal Commissioner v. Mancherji Pestonji choksey that this heading governed the construction of the new Section 297 and that a fresh line could not be prescribed with the object of widening a street. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elling this contention Sir Basil Scott, C. J., who delivered the judgment of this High Court, said (at p. 941): "To show that the result of laying down a regular line would be to enable the Commissioner to enter upon vacant land within that line under Section 299 does not show that the Commissioner was not also actuated by the necessity of laying down of regular line for the street and the existence of the incidental result does not vitiate the legality of his action". 14. Dealing with the contention about the object of acquisition the Learned Chief Justice said (at p. 941): "Then, it was contended that because the object of acquiring the land under Section 299 was to provide ground for the erection of the foundations of the bridge, the acquisition was unlawful, because there was Section 296 of the Act which provided the manner in which the Commissioner might acquire land. Now, that section gives the Commissioner power to acquire land, whether vacant or with buildings upon its whereas Section 299 only gives him power to acquire vacant land falling within the regular line of the street. Provided he had a regular line and vacant land failing within that line, it was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ges of the High Court that a consideration of the terms of Section 297, and of its setting in the Act, Shows conclusively that Section 297 is dealing with the building line of a public street, as distinguished from the boundary line or intended boundary line of a public street. In the first place the definition of 'public street' in Section 3 (x) relates to a street that is already in existence, and this definition applies in Section 297; this may be contrasted with Section 296 (1) (b) which shows that the expression 'intended' is used when appropriate. In short, the boundary line of a street is fixed prior to actual construction, and the regular line of the street is prescribed after it has come into existence. In the second place, all public streets are vested by Section 289 (1) in the Corporation, and no one is entitled to build upon them; therefore Section 297 (3) would be mere surplus age, unless it relates to building on land outside the boundary line of the street, but within the regular line of the street, and the same comment applies to Section 298 (1), and Sub-section (3) of that section must apply to the vesting of land acquired outside the boundary line ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Chandrachud, C. J., summarised the propositions to be deduced from the judgments of the Supreme Court on Article 14 of the Constitution. Propositions 3, 4 and 7 are relevant for our purposes. These propositions are as follows (at p. 509). "3. The constitutional command to the State to afford equal protection of its laws sets a goal not attainable by the invention and application of a precise formula. Therefore, classification need not be constituted by an exact or scientific exclusion or inclusion of persons or things. The Courts should not insist on delusive exactness or apply doctrinaire tests for determining the validity of classification in any given case. Classification is justified if it is not palpably arbitrary. 4. The principle underlying the guarantee of Article 14 is not that the same rules of law should be applicable to all persons within the Indian territory - or that the same remedies should be made available to them irrespective of differences of circumstances. It only means that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike both in privileges conferred and liabilities imposed Equal laws would have to be applied to all in the same situation, an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns". The question of the compensation payable under Sub-section (2) of Section 301 of the Act does not really arise in this case because it refers to compensation in respect of the setting forward of a building under Section 300 but in this case also any loss or damage which the owner of the building may suffer is to be made good to him by the Municipal Commissioner by way of compensation. The Bombay Municipal Act of 1872 by Section 163 made similar provision in respect of the land acquired when a building was ordered to be set back in circumstances similar to those provided for in our Section 298. In the Municipal Commr. for the City of Bombay v. Patel Haji Mohomed Ahmed Janu (1890) ILR 14 Bom 292, a Division Bench of this High Court held that compensation became due under the said Section 163 as soon as the Corporation took possession of the set-back land and that prima facie compensation should be assessed according to the set of things then existing, and not upon the basis of what the owner might have in his power to do, by appropriating other property which he might have at the back, towards diminishing the damage which would otherwise result to him. The said Section 163 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... compensation that can be provided for in any case of acquisition is one on the basis of the principles laid down in the Land Acquisition Act. A challenge on similar ground to the amount of compensation payable under the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1955, was negatived by the Supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. Shantilal Mangaldas, [1969]3SCR341 , referred to earlier. Sections 209 to 211, 213, 215 and 216 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act. 1949. contained provisions substantially similar to our Sections 296 to 301. The said Act by Section 212 further conferred power upon the Municipal Commissioner to order a building to be set back to the regular line of the street and to pull down such part of it as was within the regular line and to acquire the land upon which such part of the building stood. It further conferred upon the Municipal Commissioner the power, in a case where the increase in the value of the remainder of the property exceeded the amount of loss or expenses, to recover from the owner half the amount of such excess as a betterment charge. The validity of these provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act was challenged in a writ petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ply. It appears to us that this very difficulty in specifying any known rule of compensation is responsible for the wording of Section 216 and Section 389 of the Act which, in our opinion, gets over the difficulty by providing full indemnification for the loss or deprivation suffered by the owner of the building or other interests in the property. We have referred to the provisions with regard to appeals. The first, appeal lies to the Judge of the Small Causes Court and a second appeal to the District Judge. The involvement of Civil Courts in finally determining compensation imports judicial norms. Since full indemnification in accordance with judicial norms is the goal set by the Act, it is implicit in such a provision that the rules for determination of compensation shall be appropriate to the property acquired and such as will achieve the goal of full indemnity against loss. In other words, the Act provides for compensation to be determined in accordance with judicial principles by the employment of appropriate methods of valuation so that the person who is deprived of property is fully indemnified against the loss. This, by itself, in our opinion, is a specification of a prin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for each and every loss that has been sustained by him, whether it related to the land acquired or to the remainder of the property. 19. It was then contended by learned counsel for the first respondent that under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act interest was payable to the owner from the time possession was taken of the land acquired until the amount was paid or deposited as provided in the said Act, while there was no such provision in Section 301 of the Act. We are unable to accept this argument. If full indemnification is to be made to the owner, we fail to see why he would not be entitled to interest on the amount of compensation from the date of taking possession of his property, and we are informed by learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation that in fact Courts when determining compensation award interest on the amount of compensation as from the said date. 20. In support of his submission that in being paid compensation under Section 301 of the Act the first respondent was being discriminated against when compared with the owners who would be paid compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, Mr. Sakhardande, learned counsel for the first respondent, referred us ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sonable classification. We, therefore, hold that the Amending Act clearly infringes Article 14 of the Constitution and is void." In the case before us the land which could be acquired under Section 298 or 299 of the Act is not and cannot be of the same quality and value as the land falling outside the regular line of the street, because the land within the regular line of the street suffers from various disabilities which we have pointed out above. The second case relied upon was the Deputy Commissioner and Collector, Kamrup v. Durganath Sarma [1968]1SCR561 , in which the Assam Acquisition of Land for Flood Control and Prevention of Erosion Act, 1955, was held to be unconstitutional as violating Article 31(2) of the Constitution as it stood prior to the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act. Under that impugned Act the State Government had the power to acquire lands for works or other development measures in connection with flood control or prevention of erosion. The compensation provided for in that Act was admittedly nominal. The Supreme Court held that in the State of Assam some land could be taken under the impugned Act for the purpose of works and other measures in connect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the compensation payable was admittedly much less than what would be payable under the Land Acquisition Act. It was argued on behalf of the State that the impugned statutory provisions impliedly repealed the Land Acquisition Act so far as acquisitions of the type provided for in the said Section 7 were concerned. The two principles, namely (1) where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all, because that method necessarily forbids other methods and (2) that a special law dealing with a particular matter excludes the general law previously enacted and dealing with the same matter, were accepted by the Court, What was, however, found on a comparison of the two Acts was that there was no implied repeal as contended for by the State and that the provisions of the two statutes were consistent with each other and could accordingly be enforced at the same time, and thus enabled the authorities to pick and choose lands for acquisition under either of the two Acts. The impugned provision was, therefore, declared to be void as infringing Article 14 of the Constitution. As we have pointed out earlier, there is no power in the M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovision for giving a personal hearing to a person who has filed his objections to such a proposal, and (3) there is no provision for any Inquiry to be held by the Municipal Commissioner in determining compensation nor any right to the owner affected to be heard before such compensation is determined nor is there any provision for a reference or appeal to a judicial tribunal against the amount of compensation determined by the Municipal Commissioner. 23. So far as the questions of personal service of notice and personal hearing are concerned some more facts are required to be set out. Section 267 of the Act requires the giving of a public notice of the proposal to prescribe a fresh regular line of the street. For the Linking Road in the instant case it was given by the Municipal Commissioner by publication In the Maharashtra Govt, Gazette, Part II, dated Oct. 26, 196T. It was also published in ten local newspapers of different languages on the same day. By this public notice objections were invited to the proposal. Under Section 297 of the Act a special notice is also required to be put up in the street or the part of the street for which a fresh fine is proposed to be prescribed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the exercise of every power by a public authority. Similar contentions with respect to the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, and the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954, were raised before one of us (before Deshmukh J., as he then was) in Misc. Petn. No. 344 of 1974, Bharat Barrel & Drums Mfg. Co., Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra, decided on Feb. 24/25, 1976 (Unrep.) and were negatived. Even from the very nature of things, it would be extremely difficult, cumbersome and time-consuming, in cases such as this, to effect personal service of notice of the intention to prescribe a fresh regular line of the street upon each and every owner of the property who would be affected or to give them a personal hearing. Even under the Land Acquisition Act in cases of urgency referred to in Section 17 the Government or the Commissioner, as the case may be, has the power to direct that the provisions of Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act should not apply, and in such a case there would be no scope for filing any objections or giving any personal hearing to anyone wanting to object. 24. Let us also see why personal hearing is provided for by Section 5A of the Land Acquisiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y whom the personal hearing contended for by the first respondents is to be given, Under Section 297 (1) (b) (ii) it is for the Municipal Corporation to consider all objections to the proposal. In such a case the personal hearing suggested by the first respondent could only be given by the Municipal Corporation, that is, by the Councillors who have to give to the Municipal Commissioner the authority of the Corporation in a meeting of the Municipal Corporation. Such a hearing is impracticable. Once the public purpose is granted and the authority of the Municipal Corporation given and the fresh regular line is prescribed, all that remains is to take possession of land falling within the regular line of the street when it is open or becomes open, as and when it is convenient and financially feasible for the Municipal Corporation to do so. For this Section 299 provides for a 7 days' notice of the intention to take possession to be given to the owner of the land or building when the land is unbuilt upon. There is no question then of giving any hearing to the owner, for there is nothing on which he can be heard. We thus see no procedural discrimination in the absence of a provision f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context. The word 'person' is defined by the said Clause (35) as follows: "person" shall include any company or association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not,". We are unable to see anything repugnant in the subject or context in which the word 'person' is used in Section 504 to exclude from the meaning of that word the Municipal Commissioner. On the contrary, the language of that section shows that the Municipal Commissioner is in fact included. This section confers upon the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes the power to determine the amount of any expenses or compensation "except as is otherwise provided in Sections 502 and 515". Under Section 502 it is for a Magistrate who convicts a person of a municipal offence to determine the compensation payable by such person. Under Section 515 a Presidency Magistrate is conferred the power, upon any complaint made to him by any person about the existence of any nuisance, inter alia to direct the Municipal Commissioner to pay to the complainant compensation for his loss of tune in prose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nation of compensation, it is provided in Section 390 of the Corporation Act (that is, the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949). Under that section the Commissioner or such other officer as may be authorised by him shall hold such enquiry as he thinks fit and determine the amount of compensation to be paid. Either the Commissioner or an Officer authorised by him has to hold an appropriate enquiry before determining the amount of compensation. Since, as already seen, there is an appeal from such determination to the Judge of the Small Cause Court under Section 391 and a second appeal to the District Court under Section 411, it is clear that the enquiry must be made on broad judicial lines. Any arbitrary determination is bound to be set aside in appeal because the Judges in appeal will be chiefly concerned to see whether the enquiry is made in accordance with normal judicial procedures for evaluating the loss by the application of methods of valuation appropriate to the particular acquisition before them. Since no limitations are placed on the powers of the Appellate Judges in determining the loss in a just and appropriate manner, it is expected that the Commissioner or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-law, rule or regulation passed or made before the commencement of this Constitution by any Legislature, authority or person having power to make such a law, Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule or regulation". What is, therefore, to be seen under Clause (10) of Article 366 in order to determine whether any law made by a Legislature is an existing law is to see whether it was made before the commencement of the Constitution by a Legislature having any power to make such law. The Act was passed in the year 1888. The fact that it extended to some areas after the coming into force of the Constitution, does not mean that it was made after the coming into force of the Constitution, and the submission of Mr. Sakhardande that the Act is not an existing law must, therefore, be rejected. Apart from this, the challenge under Article 31(2) of the Constitution cannot survive in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad v. The State of Gujarat, 29. Mr. Sakhardande, learned Counsel for the First Respondent, also relied upon a judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Shrinivas Pitti v. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad by its Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the learned single Judge. At the hearing of these Appeals Mr. Sakhardande stated that the First Respondent was not pressing this challenge. 31. In the result, we allow both these appeals, set aside the judgment and order appealed against and dismiss the Writ Petition filed by the First Respondent with costs. 32. The First Respondent will pay to the Appellants in each of these two Appeals the costs of the Appeals. 33. The Second Respondent in both these appeals will bear and pay their own costs of the Appeals. 34. The amount deposited by the Appellants in court as security for the costs in these appeals will be refunded to the Appellants. 35. At this stage, Mr. Sakhardande, learned Counsel for the First Respondent makes an oral application for certificate of fitness to appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 133(1) of the Constitution. 36. Since we have merely followed the Supreme Court decisions, including J. K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1961)ILLJ540SC ; and The Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad v. The State of Gujarat [1973]1SCR1 , so far as all the points arising in these appeals are concerned, it is not possibl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
