K.K. POONACHA vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

The Supreme Court addressed whether the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976, is void for not receiving Presidential assent as mandated by Article 31(3) of the Constitution. The Court upheld the previous ruling in Bondu Ramaswamy v. Bangalore Development Authority, stating that non-compliance with Article 31(3) does not invalidate the Act, as it falls under Article 31(2A). The Court emphasized that the power to legislate for property acquisition is distinct and must be exercised under Entry 42 of List III, thereby affirming the validity of the 1976 Act.