SHANTISTAR BUILDERS versus NARAYAN KHIMALAL GOTAME AND ORS. ETC.

SHANTISTAR BUILDERS versus NARAYAN KHIMALAL GOTAME AND ORS. ETC.

The Supreme Court held that the government's objections to the appointment of an Additional District Judge to the monitoring committee were misconceived, as the committee's task is to implement the government-sanctioned scheme for allotting houses to the weaker sections after exemption under section 20 or 21 has been granted. The committee's role does not overlap with appeal jurisdictions under the Act, and government must comply fully with prior Supreme Court directions.

Parties
Appellant: Shantistar Builders; Respondents: Narayan Khimalal Gotame and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 November 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Disposition After Earlier Judgment and Affidavit for Modification
Outcome
appeal disposed of
Legal Topics
Allotment of Houses, Implementation of Government Schemes, Urban Land Ceiling, Weaker Sections, Constitution of Monitoring Committee
Housing Law Constitutional Law Urban Development Allotment of Houses Implementation of Government Schemes Urban Land Ceiling Weaker Sections Constitution of Monitoring Committee

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shantistar Builders

Appellant

Narayan Khimalal Gotame and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Disposition After Earlier Judgment and Affidavit for Modification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appointment of an Additional District Judge to a monitoring committee for housing allotments under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 is valid.
  2. 2 Whether the State Government's objection to the committee's composition and request for modification of Supreme Court's directions is justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the government's objections to the appointment of an Additional District Judge to the monitoring committee were misconceived, as the committee's task is to implement the government-sanctioned scheme for allotting houses to the weaker sections after exemption under section 20 or 21 has been granted. The committee's role does not overlap with appeal jurisdictions under the Act, and government must comply fully with prior Supreme Court directions.

Court Disposition

appeal disposed of

Orders

  • Government directed to constitute the committee in accordance with earlier Supreme Court directions within 30 days from receipt of this order.
  • Government to recirculate revised schemes to all concerned in light of this and earlier judgments.