Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
16 judgments · newest first · showing 1–16
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioner sought regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233 in Rajkot under the Gujarat Regularisation of Unauthorized Development Act, 2022, after the municipal corporation rejected his application on the basis of a panel advocate’s opinion without granting a hearing. The land had …
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioner challenged the Gujarat State’s rejection of his application for regularisation of a commercial building on Plot No.233, arguing that the municipal authority and appellate authority decided the matter without granting him a hearing and relied solely on a panel advocate’s opinion. The …
The petitioners, residents of the Jangleshwar and Nadoda Nagar slums in Rajkot, sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 and the Gujarat Slum Areas (Improvement Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1973 for alternative accommodation and a stay on demolition of their homes. The respondents, municipal …
The petitioners, five of twenty‑three parties, challenged a notice dated 23‑01‑2026 issued under Section 61 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, which ordered them to vacate premises within seven days without granting any hearing. The respondent authority admitted the factual correctness of the …
The petitioner, Imtyajali Memoodali Diwan, filed a special civil application seeking to quash an order dated 06.01.2026 issued under Section 61 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code directing removal of an encroachment, and a prior notice dated 06.12.2025 issued under Section 202 of the same Code. The …
The petitioners challenged a notice dated 19‑January‑2026 issued by the Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate ordering the removal of alleged illegal construction within two days, alleging it was issued without prior intimation and without citing any legal provision. The notice claimed the construction …
The petitioner, a lawful occupier of land in Talala Taluka, challenged the sealing of his premises by revenue officers on 11‑December‑2025. The sealing was carried out after a status‑quo order dated 31‑July‑2024 was not extended, despite a pending demolition order dated 26‑April‑2021 under Section …
