Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
PETITIONER:
K. RAMADAS SHENOY
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS
DATE OF JUDGMENT05/10/1993
BENCH:
PUNCHHI, M.M.
BENCH:
PUNCHHI, M.M.
SINGH N.P. (J)
CITATION:
1994 SCC Supl. (2) 516
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
ORDER
The only point for consideration which has been argued by
the learned counsel for the appellant, is that the combined
reading of Sections 48 and 49 of the Karnataka Town and
Country Planning Act, 1961 envisages a public enquiry in
which the citizens of a Municipality are entitled to raise
their voice for and against it when varying a scheme on
account of an error, irregularity or informality under
Section 48 or when revoking or varying such scheme in terms
of Section 49. The High Court of Karnataka has taken the
view that no such hearing as such claimed by the appellant
is envisaged under sub-section (2) of Section 49 because the
action impugned herein has been taken under that provision.
The argument is built by the appellant’s learned counsel on
the relativity of both the sections. Having considered the
objection from all possible angles and having heard learned
counsel in detail, we are of the view that the
interpretation given by him does not commend to us on the
plain language of the provisions employed. It is left to
the discretion of the State Government when revoking a
scheme under sub-section (2) of Section 49 to make such
inquiry as it deems fit, and such inquiry need not
necessarily extend to the citizens getting any opportunity
of being heard. We, therefore, agree with the view
expressed by the High Court in individually interpreting
that provision and dismiss the appeal. No costs.
517