Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

Land Acquisition Proceedings Not Lapsed, Twin Statutory Ingredients Fulfilled: Punjab & Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a significant ruling, dismissed a writ petition filed by Rattan Lal and others against the State of Haryana. The petitioners had sought the quashing of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 for the development of Sector 57 in Gurugram.

The bench comprising Justices Sureshwar Thakur and Kuldeep Tiwari ruled that the acquiring authority had satisfied the "twin statutory ingredients" needed to prevent the lapsing of the land acquisition proceedings.

"Consequently, in view of the written statement, it is clear that thereby accomplishment is secured by the twin statutory ingredients," Justice Sureshwar Thakur noted in paragraph 11 of the judgment.

The judgment revealed that the compensation amount was tendered and available for disbursement, thereby fulfilling one of the requirements under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act of 2013). The court also found that possession of the acquired lands had been assumed by the acquiring authority, thus meeting the second statutory requirement.

"The possession of the acquired lands, vide Rapat No.569 recorded on 21.07.2003, thus becoming assumed by the acquiring authority concerned," the court noted in paragraph 9 of the decision.

The matter had earlier reached the Supreme Court, which remanded it to the High Court for fresh consideration in line with the law laid down in "Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal".

Justice Thakur also noted that the petitioners' lands are earmarked for public purpose and are being utilized for facilitating the apposite public purpose, affecting 12 mtr. service road, 30 mtr. sector dividing road and 1 no. clinic site or 1 nursery school, as per the development plan.

The verdict puts to rest a legal tussle that had spanned several years, affirming the state’s authority to acquire the lands for the stated public purposes.

Date of Decision: 09.10.2023

RATTAN LAL AND OTHERS  vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Rattan_Lal_And_Others_vs_State_Of_Haryana_And_Ors_on_9_October_2023-1.pdf"]

Latest Legal News