Disposal of !and by the Authoritv . -The disposal of land belonging to the Authority or without carrying out… — BIHAR ACT 40 or " 1982]1

. . Disposal of !and by the Authoritv . -The disposal of land belonging to the Authority or without carrying out development thereon shall be done by the Authority in accordance with the regulations made for the purpose .

27 . . Disposal of !and by the Authoritv . -The disposal of land belonging to the Authority or without carrying out development thereon shall be done by the Authority in accordance with the regulations made for the purpose . Comments & case-taw [Grant of leases of open space inside a public park 10 various orqarusations by the Stale Government violates every concept of urban planning and ciisr.ir.;line of law which requires parks to be preserved as parks . Court :nay order buiiciing constructed inside park to be dismantled. Arun Kumar vs. Nagar fVJahapalika, 1987 All.LT . 1038. '5-, Government agency put in possession of certain lands by the State Government for the .purpose of developing the land and parcelling lhe sites and --.J.C..U,-m .,.f = ri;\I r;itp_c; should Observe the equalitv clause and be Jclif to the purchasers. Where the Development Aulhorii\f for unavoidable reasons is no: able to deliver possession. to the purchasers o allottees of some of the pio:s of land , ii should offq· them alternative plots without asking for an exorbi·:ant price. However, d1e Development Authority canr-ot . be compelled to offer plots at the old price. Haryana Urban Development Authority vs Sunit« Rekhi. AIR ,989 SC 1637. Allotmr,;nt a; residential plots.~Where the.State Government had issued advertisement fo~ sale of. plots of land, stating that .lillv enveloped plots will ba provided, thP. Supremo Court deprecated the fc::ilu ~ 0 to provide fully developed p:o,s ever. af!er e)cpiry of many years and directec hat possession of fully developed plots be given within six months. · Sector 6, Bahadurgarh Plot Holders Associafion vs. State·of Haryana, (1996) 1 sec 48b . The Developme , ~ t Authority and State Electricity Board must dischar-, e their statutory liabi1iiy to provide water and electricity connections to prospective consumers within the area . The High Court may give directions to concerned Au·,hority ·:6 provide the water and/or electric connecUoris in terms O! proviso 10 section 52 . Ranchi Regional Development Authority vs. Ranchi Municiioal Cotpo- t retion, 1!J95 ("I) BUR 572. p : tsss (2) PLJR 340.) ,r· .. .. !'>..cq11idiion oi pro _p _periies blf AuUcoritv.- The Authority mall acquire movable OF ;mmovable properties by purchase, exchange , gift , lease, !'i10,1gage or by any other method permissole unde; law . CommeRts fu case ·la:,, [Nqtice is r:ol required to be served on an occupier of !he premises whose name is not entered in Municipal assessment list. It is tnreasonaole to assume tha: a duW has been cast upon the Improvement Trust to serve not.ce on the occupier of the premises even though his name is 1ot entered iP the municipal asscssmerr iist. /l. general notice. whic!i would be :i 1oticc to all the owners and occcpiors of the premises sought to be acquired for the imorovement scheme has been provided for in Section 46 (of 1951 Act). therefore , does no! impose sucn unreasonable restrictions as to attract the provisions o ~ Ar:icle 19 (1) (f) o1 the Constitution of lndia . ShivJe11 Singh vs. Ststo , i963 8LJR 254 ]

Section 27