Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
7 judgments · newest first · showing 1–7
The Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT) had framed an improvement scheme in 1964 that provided for a 15‑metre internal road. After the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act (MRTP Act) came into force, the final Development Plans (DP) prepared under the MRTP Act in 1976, 1989 and 2001 omitted any such …
The Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT) acquired 44.61 acres of land from Sheela Ramchandra Tikhe for a drainage scheme and, under a 1968 board resolution, offered to re‑allot the land on lease. Tikhe applied for the entire parcel in 1975; after negotiations, NIT allotted only 24 acres in 1982 and …
The Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT) gifted land to the public trust Gorakshan Sabha, which later leased it to Kripa Mangal Karyalaya. The Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC) granted building permits for structures on the land, which respondents 5 and 6 challenged through a public interest litigation …
The Supreme Court examined whether the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (especially sections 6, 23(1‑A), 23(2) and 28) were incorporated into three State Acts – the Punjab Town Improvement Act, the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act and the Uttar Pradesh Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Act – or …
Krishna was appointed a trustee of the Nagpur Improvement Trust for a five‑year term under Section 4(1)(e) of the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1936. The State Government removed him before the term expired by invoking Section 6 of the Act. Krishna challenged the removal, arguing that the removal …
The Nagpur Improvement Trust appointed and promoted several employees to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) despite the State Government not having framed any rules under Section 21 of the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1936 prescribing conditions for such appointments. The Bombay High Court …
The Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT) was liable to pay non‑agricultural assessment levied under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code on lands it had leased to various lessees. The lessees contested this liability, arguing that Rule 9 of the Nagpur Improvement Trust (Land Disposal) Rules, 1955 made the …
