Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: tamil nadu municipal laws second amendment act 2011 Page 1 of about 8,813 results (0.316 seconds)

Sep 21 2016 (HC)

Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam rep. by its Organisation Secretary R.S. Bhar ...

Court : Chennai

..... issue a writ of declaration declaring the impugned amendment acts, viz., the tamil nadu municipal laws (second amendment) act, 2016 and the tamil nadu panchayats (second amendment) act, 2016, as unconstitutional, ultra vires the constitution of india and consequentially direct respondents 2, 4 and 5 to conduct the urban and rural local bodies election 2016 based on the delimitation of wards to be made based on 2011 census with corresponding reservation to women, scheduled caste ..... political parties in the state of tamil nadu praying this court for the following reliefs :- i) to declare the tamil nadu municipal laws (2nd amendment) act, 2016 and the tamil nadu panchayats (2nd amendment) act, 2016 as ultra vires the constitution ; ii) to direct the respective respondents to conduct the urban and rural local bodies election 2016 based on the delimitation of wards to be made based on 2011 census with corresponding reservation ; iii) to ..... particularly all urban local bodies. w.p. no.28370 of 2016 has been filed praying this court to issue a writ of declaration declaring that the impugned amendment acts, viz., (i) tamil nadu municipal laws (2nd amendment) act, 2016 and (ii) the tamil nadu panchayat (2nd amendment) act, 2016, issued by the 1st respondent published in the official gazette as unconstitutional, motivated, unreasonable and ultra vires the constitution of india particularly part ix and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 2016 (HC)

Padam Kumar Jain Vs. The Union of India Through the Ministry of Mines ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... refuse extension of the mining lease itself. such a proposition is also not legally sound and tenable to be accepted in the scheme of the amended act. [see: state of tamil nadu and others versus k. shyam sunder and others [(2011) 8 scc737 para-44, 45 & 49] 84. in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the apex court in the case of common cause ..... 2007) 11 scc40. it is reiterated on their part that m.m.d.r. act, 1957 post 2015 amendment, does not contemplate any procedure for denying extension / rejecting the applications for renewal / extension ..... the grievances of the mining industry due to second and subsequent renewal pending and also because provisions of law relating to rules have been found to be wanting. the impugned action of the respondent state are therefore substantively ultra vires as it has got no power or jurisdiction to refuse extension under the amendment act, 2015. reliance has been placed upon para- ..... the apex court in the case of state of tamil nadu vs. hind stone & others reported in [(1981) 2 scc205 union of india & others vs. indian charge chrome & another [(1999) 7 scc314, chairman cum managing director, coal india ltd. & others vs. ananta saha & others [(2011) 5 scc142 and in the case of commissioner of municipal corporation, simla vs. prem lata sood & others [( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 2016 (HC)

Ms Shah Brothers Through One of Its Partner Sri Raj Kumar Shah Vs. The ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... refuse extension of the mining lease itself. such a proposition is also not legally sound and tenable to be accepted in the scheme of the amended act. [see: state of tamil nadu and others versus k. shyam sunder and others [(2011) 8 scc737 para-44, 45 & 49] 84. in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the apex court in the case of common cause ..... 2007) 11 scc40. it is reiterated on their part that m.m.d.r. act, 1957 post 2015 amendment, does not contemplate any procedure for denying extension / rejecting the applications for renewal / extension ..... the grievances of the mining industry due to second and subsequent renewal pending and also because provisions of law relating to rules have been found to be wanting. the impugned action of the respondent state are therefore substantively ultra vires as it has got no power or jurisdiction to refuse extension under the amendment act, 2015. reliance has been placed upon para- ..... the apex court in the case of state of tamil nadu vs. hind stone & others reported in [(1981) 2 scc205 union of india & others vs. indian charge chrome & another [(1999) 7 scc314, chairman cum managing director, coal india ltd. & others vs. ananta saha & others [(2011) 5 scc142 and in the case of commissioner of municipal corporation, simla vs. prem lata sood & others [( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 2016 (HC)

Anil Khirwal Vs. The Union of India Through the Ministry of Mines and ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... refuse extension of the mining lease itself. such a proposition is also not legally sound and tenable to be accepted in the scheme of the amended act. [see: state of tamil nadu and others versus k. shyam sunder and others [(2011) 8 scc737 para-44, 45 & 49] 84. in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the apex court in the case of common cause ..... 2007) 11 scc40. it is reiterated on their part that m.m.d.r. act, 1957 post 2015 amendment, does not contemplate any procedure for denying extension / rejecting the applications for renewal / extension ..... the grievances of the mining industry due to second and subsequent renewal pending and also because provisions of law relating to rules have been found to be wanting. the impugned action of the respondent state are therefore substantively ultra vires as it has got no power or jurisdiction to refuse extension under the amendment act, 2015. reliance has been placed upon para- ..... the apex court in the case of state of tamil nadu vs. hind stone & others reported in [(1981) 2 scc205 union of india & others vs. indian charge chrome & another [(1999) 7 scc314, chairman cum managing director, coal india ltd. & others vs. ananta saha & others [(2011) 5 scc142 and in the case of commissioner of municipal corporation, simla vs. prem lata sood & others [( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 17 2012 (HC)

S.Kannan. Vs. the Commissioner

Court : Chennai

..... square feet basis. section 80(3) was substituted by tamil nadu municipal laws (amendment) act, 2009. as per section 2 of the amendment act, town panchayats, municipalities and municipal corporations shall be graded as under:-a grade.. municipal corporations and special grade municipalities.b grade.. selection grade and first grade municipalities.c grade.. second grade, third grade municipalities and town panchayats.11. section 3 of amendment act stipulates minimum and maximum rate of property tax leviable on ..... in respect of vacant lands and by the judgment dated 20.07.2011, the division bench dismissed the writ appeal.9. there is no force in the contention of the learned counsel for appellant that the municipality has no power under tamil nadu district municipalities act to levy, demand and collect vacant land tax. the municipality is empowered to levy the property tax. section 81 of the ..... )no.3683 of 2009 on the file of this court.judgmentr.banumathi,j1. this appeal arises out of the order dismissing w.p.(md) no.3683 of 2009 (22.11.2011) whereby the writ court declined to quash levy, demand and collection of vacant land tax as condition precedent for grant of sub division and also approval of building plan.2 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 2015 (HC)

S. Karuppiah, Founder of Central and State Government, Scheduled Caste ...

Court : Chennai

..... sub-section (1). ? 8. in paragraph 16 of the counter affidavit, it is specifically averred that as per article 19(1)(c) of the constitution of india as amended by the 97th amendment act, 2011, the right to form a co-operative society has become a fundamental right, which would include the other rights incidental to the formation of a society, including the right ..... , the petitioner cannot presume that such a reservation must exist for the post of president of a co-operative society. 7. the government of tamil nadu is stated to have amended various provisions of the said act vide the tamil nadu ordinance no.1 of 2013 published in the government gazette on 21.1.2013 in order to bring them in conformity with the mandate of ..... no merit in the petition. the parliament enacts the law. the court interprets the law. the parliament in its wisdom provided for in the 73rd amendment, while dealing with part ix-a of the municipalities, such kind of reservation by rotation even for chairpersons. however, while making the subsequent amendment by the 97th amendment in the year 2011 in respect of part ix-b dealing with co ..... the post of president in the co-operative societies for any section of the society. however, article 243-zj of the constitution of india has the second proviso requiring the legislature of a state, by law, to provide for reservation of one seat for the scheduled castes or scheduled tribes and two seats for women on the board of every co-operative .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 2012 (HC)

Brihanmumbai Mahanagarpalika and Another Vs. the Secretary, Bar Counci ...

Court : Mumbai

..... 1971 sc 2399 and state of j. and k. vs. a.r.zakki, air 1992 sc 1546 at para 10). in state of tamil nadu vs. k. shyam sunder, (2011) 8 scc 737)the supreme court held that if an amending act of the legislature is struck down for want of legislative competence or on the ground that it is violative of the fundamental rights ..... as an advocate so long as he continues in such employment ? . the exception which was available under the second paragraph of rule 49 stood deleted. municipal law officers in the full time employment of the municipal corporation of greater mumbai can no longer assert an entitlement to act, appear and plead in any court. constitutional validity: 23. the deletion of the exception to rule 49 ..... for work in the court. if they are so engaged, no matter what the terms of engagement are, the exemption under rule 49 would apply; (v) municipal law officers fell within the purview of the second and third paragraphs of rule 49 and rule 1(vi) of the rules framed by the bar council of maharashtra and goa. since an exemption was granted ..... under proviso (vi) to rule 1 of the rules framed by the state bar council, municipal law officers are entitled to the benefit of the exception carved out by rule 49; (vi) the logic underlying the second and third paragraphs of rule 49 still continues. the resolution passed by the bar council of india to delete the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 2012 (HC)

Brihanmumbai Mahanagarpalika and Another Vs. the Secretary, Bar Counci ...

Court : Mumbai

..... 1971 sc 2399 and state of j. and k. vs. a.r.zakki, air 1992 sc 1546 at para 10). in state of tamil nadu vs. k. shyam sunder, (2011) 8 scc 737)the supreme court held that if an amending act of the legislature is struck down for want of legislative competence or on the ground that it is violative of the fundamental rights ..... as an advocate so long as he continues in such employment. the exception which was available under the second paragraph of rule 49 stood deleted. municipal law officers in the full time employment of the municipal corporation of greater mumbai can no longer assert an entitlement to act, appear and plead in any court. constitutional validity: 23. the deletion of the exception to rule 49 ..... for work in the court. if they are so engaged, no matter what the terms of engagement are, the exemption under rule 49 would apply; (v) municipal law officers fell within the purview of the second and third paragraphs of rule 49 and rule 1(vi) of the rules framed by the bar council of maharashtra and goa. since an exemption was granted ..... under proviso (vi) to rule 1 of the rules framed by the state bar council, municipal law officers are entitled to the benefit of the exception carved out by rule 49; (vi) the logic underlying the second and third paragraphs of rule 49 still continues. the resolution passed by the bar council of india to delete the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 04 2004 (HC)

Raja Murali Advertising Consultancy, Partnership Firm, Rep. by Partner ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR2005Mad112; 2004(5)CTC679; (2004)4MLJ672

..... movement, so as to adversely affect free and safe flow of traffic and which is in existence immediately before the date of the commencement of the tamil nadu municipal laws (amendment) act, 2000 (hereafter in this section referred to as the amendment act), the district collector shall by notice in writing, require the licensee or any person in possession, of such hoarding, to remove such hoarding within ..... removal of the hoardings.4. per contra, mrs. p. bhagyalakshmi, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/corporation contends that as per amendment of section 326-j of the act, the district collector is a competent authority to go into the aspect in view of the tamil nadu act 19 of 2003, but not the commissioner. however, she is not in a position to satisfy ..... us as to whether the second respondent/corporation has satisfied himself that the impugned hoarding is ..... 3. mr. m. venkatachalapathy, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant/writ petitioner brought to our notice that out of the two hoardings, one was already removed by the second respondent/corporation immediately after dismissal of the writ petition and there is only one hoarding now, which was erected at y.m.c.a., nandanam having measurement of 110 feet .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 2017 (HC)

A. Kuberan Vs. The Commissioner, Villupuram Municipality, Villupuram

Court : Chennai

..... by the legislature then, as could be seen from the tamil nadu municipal laws (third amendment) act 2008 (tamil nadu act 36 of 2008), which came into effect from 25.06.2008 vide g.o. ms.no.116, municipal administration and water supply department. the third amendment act did not amend section 345. only subsequently, in the year 2008, section 345 was amended and the period of 3 years was extended to 12 years ..... any distraint proceedings should be initiated within three years from the date on which it might have first been commenced. the provisions of section 345 of the tamil nadu district municipalities act, came up for consideration in municipal council of trichinopoly vs. ratnam pillai (deceased) and others [1935 lw 457], wherein, it was held as under: the lower courts held that s.345 of ..... 5. mr.v. jayaprakash narayanan, learned special government pleader controverted the above submissions. 6. to appreciate the rival contentions, it may be necessary to extract section 345 of the tamil nadu district municipalities act, 1920 as it stood in the year 2003 and it reads as follows: "345. limitation for recovery of dues:- no distraint shall be made, no suit shall be instituted and ..... half year. so under this section, the petitioner should have paid the amount due for the first half year within the 1st may 1930 and the amount due for the second half year within the 1st november 1930. under s.345 the period of limitation for a suit to recover the said sum is three years from the date when a .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //