LexLords NRI Legal Services Harrow By NRI Legal Services LexLords

The prosecution were criticised for not calling the magis- trate who recorded the confession as a witness. On the other hand, on behalf of the Corporation and so also for the Collector, it is argued that the award was made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 31-1-2008 strictly in terms of the 1894 Act and on the very day the landowners were informed regarding the quantum of compensation for their NRI legal services (read this post here) respective lands. This proviso postulates giving weightage of marks to specified in-service candidates who have worked in notified remote and/or difficult areas in the State " both for Post Graduate Degree Courses as also for Post Graduate Diploma Courses.

According to us, in Section 3(f)(vi) the expression "housing" has been used along with educational and health schemes. The remedies for the redress of grievances or the correction of errors are found in the statute itself and it is to these remedies that resort must generally be had. (emphasis laid by this Court) It is further submitted that a perusal of the above extracted portion of the judgment would show that prior approval of the government to the Housing Scheme, as contemplated under Section 3(f) (vi) of the L.

King Emperor (1) regarding the undesirability of such a prac- tice. Thus we have before us a complete and precise scheme for regulating the issue of permits, providing what matters are to be taken into consideration as relevant, and prescribing appeals and revisions from subordinate bodies to higher authorities. Act is a condition precedent for the exercise of eminent domain power by the state government for acquisition of lands for the purpose of the housing scheme of a Co-operative society.

If requirement of Section 3(f)(vi) is not strictly enforced, every housing co- operative society shall approach the appropriate Government for acquisition by applying Section 3(f)(vi) instead of pursuing the acquisition under Part VII of the Act which has become more rigorous and restrictive. It is, thus, submitted that there was no default on the part of the Special Land Acquisition Officer or the Government and, hence, the acquisition proceedings have not lapsed.

In our opinion, the magistrate was rightly not called and it would have been improper and undesirable for the prosecution to have acted otherwise. In this background, it has to be held that the prior approval, required by Section 3(f)(vi), of the appropriate Government is not just a formality; it is a condition precedent to the exercise of the power of acquisition by the appropriate Government for a housing scheme of a co-operative society.

In so overruling the Division Bench judgment, this Court held that the Act is not expressly retrospective, so that an enquiry would lie as to whether it could be said to be clarificatory or declaratory. As such the housing scheme contemplated by Section 3(f)(vi) shall be such housing scheme which shall serve the maximum number of members of the society. Further, the weightage of marks so allotted is required to be reckoned while preparing the merit list of candidates.

The language of Section 4(1) of the statute made it clear that it would apply to suits filed only after the 1988 Act came into force Further, the Bench went on to quote Maxwell on Interpretation as follows: Prem Behari Khare, [1989] INSC 59; (1989) 2 SCC 95, in arriving at the conclusion that the 1988 Act was prospective and not retrospective. Such housing scheme should prove to be useful to the public. That is why the Parliament while introducing a new definition of "public purpose", said that any scheme submitted by any co-operative society relating to housing, must receive prior approval of the appropriate Government and then only the acquisition of the land for such scheme can be held to be for public purpose.

(3) The fund constituted under sub-section (2) shall be applied and utilised for the purpose of providing an efficient NRI legal services service for the people of the State and to provide social security measures for the NRI legal services (learn more) profession. A 3-Judge Bench of this Court overruled Mithilesh Kumari v. From the plain language of this proviso, it is amply clear that it does not envisage reservation for in-service candidates in respect of Post Graduate Degree Courses with which we are presently concerned.

Notices were also issued to the landowners to reach the Office of the Special Land Acquisition Officer and receive the amount of compensation and since they neither received the compensation nor any request came from them to make reference to the District Court under Section 18, the compensation amounting to Rs 27 crores was deposited in the Government treasury. We wish to endorse the remarks of their 539 Lordships of the Privy Council in Nazir Ahrnad v.

Consequently, the existence of Housing Scheme framed by the respondent-Society is a pre-condition for grant of approval of the same by the State Government. Padmini Chandrasekharan, [1995] INSC 98; (1995) 2 SCC 630, this Court was called upon to interpret the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988.