Bare Act Search Results

The Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act, 1954 Complete Act

State: Rajasthan

Year: 1954

.....1954 [Act No. XXI of 1954] (Received the assent of the President on the 6th day of November, 1954) As amended subsequently by the following Acts-Raj Act 27 of 1957. Raj Act 21 of 1960. Raj Act 8 of 1962 w.e.f. 16-11-1961. Raj Act 29 of 1992 w.e.f. 17-11-1992. An Act to regulate irrigation and drainage in the State of Rajasthan. Be it enacted by the Rajasthan State Legislature as follows :- 1. Short title and extent. - ( Subs, by Act 27 of 1957) This Act may be called the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act, 1954. [(Subs, lay Act 27 of 1957) It extends to the whole of the State of Rajasthan]. 2. Commencement. - It shall come into force on such date (Came into force from 1st April, 1956 vide Notfn. No.F.2 (108) Ire. 52, dated 22.3.1956) and in such areas as the State Government may by notification in the [Official Gazette] specify from time to time. 4 Subs, by Act 27 of 1957. COMMENTARY 1. Constitution of India, Art. 226-Objection as to jurisdiction not raised before Tribunal-Objection cannot be allowed.- There is no mention of this objection having been raised before him and it is well settled that if an objection as to the jurisdiction of a Tribunal is.....

Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904, (Maharashtra) Section 7

Title: Effect of Repeal

State: Maharashtra

Year: 1904

.....Pandurang, I. L. R. 1960 Bom. 172 : 1959 Bom. L. R. 1112; Sakharam Narayan v. Manikchand, 1955 (57) Bom.. L. R. 223 followed. Repeal of rules when new rules framed.-Framing of new octroi rules would repeal earlier one by necessary implication even though some other rules were repealed specifically.-Swastik Rubber Products Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation for the City of Poona, 1981 (4) SCC 219 : AIR 1981 SC 2022. When a temporary Act lapses, the rules and orders made thereunder expire.-State of Bombay v. Heman Shantilal, AIR 1952 Bom. 16. Section 7(1) of the Act would be applicable to the repeal of Poona City Municipal Corporation, rule 5(8) of the Exemption Rules and the consequences stated therein must follow, unless there is something in the repealed rule itself which ends the exemption.-Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation for the City of Poona, 1969 Man. L. J. 832. Repealed Notification.-It was held that the Notification even if it continued in force because of the application of section 25 of the Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904, extended the Ordinance and not the Act. In the result, the connection made by the State that the Act had been.....