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