Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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