Illegal Excavation | State Must Probe Offences Under MMDR & Forest Acts Along With General Penal Law, File Supplementary Chargesheet: Supreme Court Accused In Custody For 30 Months Out Of Maximum 3-Year Sentence Entitled To Bail Despite Criminal Antecedents If Trial Protracted: Supreme Court Section 17A PC Act | Prior Approval Not Required To Investigate Public Servant Accused Of Demanding Bribe: Supreme Court Town Planning Residential Zoning Cannot Override Bar On Patta Over Water Bodies; State Must Allot Alternate Site Before Demolishing Flats: Supreme Court Section 4A Census Act | Private Unaided Schools Not 'Local Authority', Teachers Cannot Be Requisitioned For Census Duty: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Interim Stay SC/ST Act | Magistrate Recording Statements Under Sections 200 & 202 CrPC Before Transfer Is Curable Irregularity, Won't Vitiate Trial: Allahabad High Court Ad Interim Attachment Order Under Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 1944 Lapses Automatically After One Year If Cognizance Not Taken: Andhra Pradesh High Court Section 306 IPC | Instigation Can Be Inferred From Continued Harassment, Absence Of Suicide Note No Ground For Discharge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Regular Bail May Be Granted Subject To Verification Of Past Criminal Antecedents In Property Offences: Orissa High Court Litigant Should Not Suffer For Counsel’s Illness: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Closing Evidence DV Act | Interim Stay Of Residence Order By Appellate Court Cannot Deprive Aged Parent Of Dignity And Shelter: Madras High Court Section 13(1)(ia) Hindu Marriage Act | Mere Matrimonial Discord And Incompatibility Do Not Constitute 'Cruelty': Karnataka High Court Section 482 BNSS | Grant Of Anticipatory Bail Where Custodial Interrogation Is Unnecessary Despite Allegations Of Large-Scale Financial Irregularities: Kerala High Court Manipulated Seizure Memos and Inconsistent Testimonies Vitiate Prosecution Case Under NDPS Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 15 & 31 J&K Evacuee Property Act 1949 Do Not Bar Civil Court's Jurisdiction In Injunction Suits Between Private Parties: J&K High Court Section 25 Hindu Marriage Act | Court Can Grant Permanent Alimony Even On Oral Application While Passing Divorce Decree: Jharkhand High Court Co-Accused Has No Legal Right To Be Heard At The Stage Of Tendering Pardon: Delhi High Court Sale Proceeds Of Flats Constructed For Leasing Out Must Be Taxed As 'Capital Gains' And Not Business Income Merely Because Sale Followed Receipt Of OC: Bombay High Court Section 138 NI Act | Accused Cannot Seek Expert Opinion To Rebut Statutory Presumption When Signature On Cheque Is Admitted: Gujarat High Court Recruitment Rules Framed Under Administrative Necessity Are Not Subject To Norms Designed For Other Central Government Hospitals: Delhi High Court

Supreme Court Quashes High Court's Decision for Lack of Fair Hearing and Violation of Natural Justice Principles in the Azamgarh School Land Allocation Case

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on March 11, 2024, the Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, overturned a previous decision by the Allahabad High Court regarding the allocation of land for the construction of a primary school in Azamgarh. The apex court's judgment addressed key legal points concerning public interest litigation, the role of land management committees, and adherence to the principles of natural justice.

The judgement revolved around the legality of the allocation of land for constructing a primary school, which was earlier demolished for a National Highway project. The court examined the roles and responsibilities of the Land Management Committee and the State authorities in such allocations.

The primary school in Mai Kharagpur village, Azamgarh, was demolished for a National Highway project. The villagers requested a new school, leading to the Land Management Committee proposing a land plot for construction. However, the respondents filed multiple writ petitions, eventually leading to the Allahabad High Court quashing the proposal. The appellant, Suneeta Devi, challenged this decision in the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court criticized the High Court for hastily making its decision without issuing formal notices or giving a fair opportunity for all parties to be heard, thus violating principles of natural justice. The court also highlighted the misuse of Public Interest Litigation by the respondents for personal gain and noted the concealment of facts in filing successive writ petitions.

The Supreme Court quashed the Allahabad High Court's order, labeling it as suffering from "patent illegality, perversity and having been passed in sheer violation of principles of natural justice." The appeal by Suneeta Devi was allowed, reinstating the decision to allocate land for the school.

Date of Decision: March 11, 2024.

Suneeta Devi vs. Avinash and Others,

Latest Legal News