Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: kannada development authority act 1994 section 17 obtaining information Court: orissa Page 1 of about 586 results (0.065 seconds)

Biranchi Narayan Das and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 108(2009)CLT397

..... mentioned that any person who is injuriously affected by the above scheme being entitled to claim damages in accordance with section 65 of the orissa development authorities act, 1982 should details of the claim to the valuation officer within 3 months of the date of publication of this notification with supporting documents & ..... officer (p-241/c) stipulated that any injuriously affected person can communicate his claim for damages under section 65 of orissa development authorities act, 1982. but section 65 of oda act placed below stipulates tor determination of compensation in terms of value of the tend. it does not provide in any manner ..... taken in course of implementation of town planning scheme no. ii.2. the bhubaneswar development authority had prepared town planning scheme no. 2 for nayapalli (north) in exercise of powers conferred under chapter vi of the orissa development authorities act, 1982. para-4 of the scheme made provision for adequate road network, infrastructural facilities .....

Radhaballav Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 100(2005)CLT527; 2005(I)OLR507

..... petitioner had filed ojc no. 7646 of 1998 before this court challenging the action taken by opposite party no. 2, puri-konark development authority, under section 91 of the orissa development authority act for demolition of a building constructed by him without obtaining due permission and/or sanction of plan, and also violating the provisions of ..... to the notice of the court that the construction was made without obtaining prior permission and/or had been made beyond the norms of the development authority act and that it grossly violated the provisions made in the coastal zone regulations. it was further alleged that under the cover of the interim order ..... court may take a liberal view and condone the delay in order to give substantial justice.3. on receiving notice, opposite party no. 2, puri-konark development authority, entered appearance through its counsel and filed a counter-affidavit opposing the prayer for condonation of delay.4. mr. patnaik, learned senior advocate appearing for the .....

Gobinda Chandra Sahoo and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 108(2009)CLT96

..... 12.10.1999. petitioners raised construction on the said land without getting the plan sanctioned from the bhubaneswar development authority as required under the provisions of the orissa development authorities act, 1982. thus, there is an order for demolition of the construction. hence the petitioners have challenged the ..... land acquisition proceedings.3. mr. a.c. mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioners has raised large number of issues challenging the land acquisition proceedings including that there was no opportunity to file objections as required under section 5a of the act ..... compensation since he steps into the shoes of the erstwhile owner and may merely claim compensation.10. however, in subsequent judgment in jaipur development authority v. mahavir housing coop. society, jaipur and ors. : (1996) 11 scc 229, the apex court, though did not decide .....

Praxair India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sub-collector and Sub-divisional Magistrat ...

Court : Orissa

..... further seen that form-iii of the regulations is the specimen of the application for drawing of attention under sub-section (7) of section 16 of the orissa development authorities act, 1982. the petitioner has sent the said notice in the prescribed format and it also appears from annexure-9 at page 48 that the document has been sent ..... prayed for a direction to the opposite parties to accept the status of deemed grant of permission under section 16(8) of the orissa development authorities act, 1982 (hereinafter 2 referred to as the act .) and further to direct the opposite parties not to interfere with the petitioner s lawful activities at the pump fill station set up at ..... are hereby quashed. the opposite parties are directed to accept the status of the petitioner as having granted deemed permission under section 16(8) of the orissa development authorities act, 1982. . s.k.mishra, j.pradip mohanty, a.c.j.i agree. .. pradip mohanty, a.c.j.orissa high court, cuttack, dated, january 29, 2013 .....

Parameswar Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 86(1998)CLT170; 1997(II)OLR444

..... encroachment as aforesaid, does not or is not likely to prejudice or adversely affect - (i) any development scheme, programme or work specified by general or special order made in that behalf by the state government or the prescribed authority ; or (ii) the interests of the general public or of the village community.' 11. all ..... site, whether or not recorded as such in the record-of-rights; (iii) likely to be required for any development scheme and are declared as such in the manner prescribed by rules made under this act by the state government by a notification; (c) lands unauthorisedly occupied by persons, who had once before been ..... the revenue administration of a district and shall include an additional district magistrate ; (b) 'prescribed' means prescribed by rules made by the state/ government under this act; and (c) 'tahasildar' means the chief officer in charge of the revenue administration of a tahasil and shall include an additional tahasildar.'later definition of certain other .....

M/S.Ortel Communications Ltd. Vs. Mr.K.Raghuramaya and anr.

Court : Orissa

..... contempt.7. mr. rao, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 placed reliance on a judgment of the high court of karnataka in the case of banglore development authority v. gururaj s/o. late m.s. prithviraj and b.v.ram murthy, reported in ilr (2007) kar 5184, in support of his contention that, the ..... as serious contempts. similarly, deceiving the court or the court's officers by deliberately suppressing a fact, or giving false facts, may be a punishable contempt. certain acts of a lesser nature may also constitute an abuse or process as, for instance, initiating or carrying on proceedings which are wanting in bona fides or which are frivolous ..... 's writ application had been dismissed, yet the petitioner went ahead and filed a contempt application, interalia, on the allegation that the paradeep port trust have not acted in terms of the observations made in paragraph-14 of the judgment by this court. the aforesaid allegation raised while being wholly incorrect, the direction of this court .....

Laxmi Narayan Agarwalla and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Orissa and ors. Etc ...

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1983Ori210

..... either the extraction of the mineral or on the mineral right.......'their lordships held that the central act of 1957 did not denude the state legislature of its power to impose cess.in western coalfields ltd. v. special area development authority, korba, air 1982 sc 697, the controversy was whether property tax could be imposed on ..... the lands and buildings which were used for the purpose of mining operations and were covered by coal mines. it was urged therein that when by virtue of the declaration in section 2 of the central act of ..... 3. the petitioners hold mining leases granted by the state of orissa under the provisions of the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act of 1987 (central act 67 of 1957) (hereinafter called 'the central act of 1957') read with the mineral concession rules, 1960 and are carrying on mining operations.4. mr. govind das, the learned .....

Smt. Sushila Devi Rungta Vs. State of Orissa, Through Chief Secretary, ...

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 1999(I)OLR549

..... construction. in response to the said notice, smt. rungta submitted her show-cause and also a revised plan for approval in terms of section 16, of the orissa development authority act, 1982. in the meantime, shri jagannath das filed title suit no. 21 of 1996 in the court of civil judge, senior division, rourkela for a declaration that ..... smt. rungta on the disputed plot. on the basis of such complaint the rourkela development authority (hereinafter referred to as the 'rda') issued notice no. 198/rda, under sections 31(3) and 33(1) of the orissa town planning and improvement trust act, 1956 asking her to stop further construction and to show cause within 7 days why ..... existence. it appears that smt. rungta by her letter dated november 22, 1996 expressly accepted the order of the appellate authority and practically invited the r.d.a. to take proper action in accordance with the provisions of development act, 1982 (annexure - k/3) to the counter affidavit of opp. parties 3 and 4. in the said .....

Ashok Biri and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 2001(I)OLR586

..... kendu leaves. it prepares bidi with kendu leaves in the name and style of 'ashok bidi' at its factory situated in the state of west bengal. the orissa forest development corporation limited, opposite party no. 3 (hereinafter referred to as 'o.f.d.c.') is a government of orissa undertaking. trade in kendu leaves in the state of ..... inter-state sale. the assessment was annulled in appeal filed by the assessee which was confirmed in second appeal by the sales tax tribunal. both the first appellate authority and the sales tax tribunal held the transaction to be intra-state sale because there was nothing on record to indicate existence of agreement either express or implied basing ..... purchasers and the sale/purchase did not occasion movement of goods from state of orissa to outside the state. the basic ingredients to attract section 3(.a) of the act were found absent. therefore, the sale was held to be intra- state sale and not inter-state.8. keeping the aforesaid legal position in view, let us .....

Sundargarh Citizen's Forum Vs. Orissa State Road Transport Corporation ...

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 2009(I)OLR361

..... the decision maker and stockholders', uncertainty and thereby breach of rule of will not arise. (vide reliance airport developers (p) ltd. v. airport authority of india (2006) 10 scc 5, and reliance energy ltd. and anr. v. maharashtra state road development corporation ltd. and ors. : (2007)8scc1 ).49. thus, the law on the issue can be summarised ..... the context of the proviso to section 21(1) of the u.p. urban buildings (regulation of letting, rent and eviction) act, 1972 that it means taking cognizance of a case by the competent authority by issuing summons for hearing to the tenant.17. thus, in view of the above, it is evident that 'entertain'. means ..... certain orders in the writ petition and disposed of the same. subsequently, another writ petition was filed giving reference to certain provisions of the forest (conservation) act, 1980, which had not been referred to in the earlier case. the court rejected the contention of applicability of principle of res judicata observing as under:.at .....