pqy p, pp — BIHAR ACT 40 or " 1982]1 — Roop's Law Assist Statutes

1 pqy p, pp will leaO: to i1mmonious construction rather than one that will result 1: ~ incense ency omake , provision. redundant. Mosst. Pomlo vs. Hirata/ IV/ahto , · 982 : PLJP 858. There is urgent need for taking effective steps tor ensuring prevention descretion or damage to monuments of historical and archaeoloqlca' importarc Courts are competent to give directions for shiting industrial units for effeciuati1 this purpose . Surondra Kumar Singh vs. State of Bihar, i 99·1 {2) PLJR ""i·1 iS( Authorities are bound by the procedures laid down by them. Unless !"le pr cedure laid cown is , complied · with the order passed :n violation thoreo: would I subject to judicial review. Rajdeo Pissed vs . State of Bihar, 1990 (2) PLJR 20 A Corporation may be " State" within the meaning of Article 12 of , he Co stitution being an instrumentality of State , but an agreement entered into I such Corporation cannot be termed as an aqreoment ·by . the State so as to < tract Article 29!) ot the Constitution . Usha Breece Ltd. vs . State or Bihw; 191 (1) PLJ1 183 Auction Purchaser of land or building through open auction bid -csnnot : equated with allortes under Hire Purchase Scheme of the State GovemMer( any Housing Authority . Rajendra Prssed. d. Singh vs . State , "i 993 (t J PLJR 36i The Act 'las been enacted to provide for the development of various r gions of the State of Bihar . By reason . of the regulatory measures provided the Act and iis Bye-Laws , .the right of an individual to ul~ise his privaiely owrn land in ' any manner he may choose has been · sornewt~t rsstricted, Uma Sh.va Parivar Trust v:: State of 81har. 1990 (t) PLJR 503 . Development Authority may adopt the mode oS draw of lots jor makinq , lotme·1t of plots of land to applicants, where number of applicants is much mo than the available number of plots of land or housing units. Whern such allc ments are mac " from time to time continuously, there is nothinq unfair in 11 · Authority asking to· payment at the rate prevailing at the lime or altotrnent, wi option to the .., llottee to accept or decline the offer . ODA vs . PK. Jeir; 19f Supp. (3). sec 494. . A Statutorv Authority has no power to review an order , unless the ;:iower review has been conferred upon i1 expressly or by necessary implicalion. HO\ ever all Statu1o. '· ' .,..ribunals have. power or procedural review. Bigna Ram vs. Sta nf Rih~r "'~% l1 ' PLJR 502 . .. ,~ ] Tha Principle of natural justice as a part of procedural law has ocen c1p piied and extended to quasi-judicial proceedings and administrative matters to i pqjpg ensure that no one is adversely affected without reasonable opportunity and fair :,eating . No order can be passed without hearing a person lf it entails civil con d sequences, UP. Aw.;,s Eva.m Vikash 0 3rishad v!:. Gyan Devi, (1995) 2 sec 326. fliialafide.-A plea of malatide must be clearly alleged· and stnctly proved. A- finding of rnalatido cannot be . recorded on vague allegations unsupported by cogent materials. R. B.A.G G.f I.C.S. ltd vs Steto of Biher, 1995 (1) PLJR 164 . Legitimate Expcctation.c,-..Fair procedure and just treatment ir, the core. of !r.dian Jurisprudence . The principle ot ' legitimate expectations' applies where a person having no enforceable rights is ynt affected or is likely to be afrncted by order passed by Public Authority , U.P. Awas Evam vikest: Perisned vs. Gyen D , 9vt; ("1995) 2 sec 326. Taxing Statutes.-Ta)(ing Statutes are lo be strictly construed. If the subject rnal' er of tax does not fall within the plain language of the taxinq provision, no ax an be imposed. Puri Munfcipa( Council vs . Indian Tobacco Co. l.td. , (i996) 1 sec 293.J

Section 1