State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 License Fee on Hoardings is Regulatory, Not Tax; GST Does Not Bar Municipal Levy: Bombay High Court Filing Forged Bank Statement to Mislead Court in Maintenance Case Is Prima Facie Offence Under Section 466 IPC: Allahabad High Court Upholds Summoning Continued Cruelty and Concealment of Infertility Justify Divorce: Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Divorce Disguising Punishment as Simplicity Is Abuse of Power: Delhi High Court Quashes Dismissals of Civil Defence Volunteers for Being Stigmatic, Not Simpliciter Marriage Cannot Be Perpetuated on Paper When Cohabitation Has Ceased for Decades: Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 to Grant Divorce Despite Wife’s Opposition Ownership of Trucks Does Not Mean Windfall Compensation: Supreme Court Slashes Inflated Motor Accident Award in Absence of Documentary Proof Concealment of Mortgage Is Fraud, Not a Technical Omission: Supreme Court Restores Refund Decree, Slams High Court’s Remand State Reorganization Does Not Automatically Convert Cooperative Societies into Multi-State Entities: Supreme Court Rejects Blanket Interpretation of Section 103 Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Once a Court Declares a Department an Industry Under Section 2(j), State Cannot Raise the Same Objection Again: Gujarat High Court Slams Repetitive Litigation by Irrigation Department “How Could Cheques Issued in 2020 Be Mentioned in a 2019 Contract?”: Delhi High Court Grants Injunction in Forged MOA Case, Slams Prima Facie Fabrication

Supreme Court Quashes Land Release Orders, Highlights Arbitrary Exercise of Power in Land Acquisition

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Intro: In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has quashed the release orders of acquired land, emphasizing the arbitrary exercise of power by the State of Haryana. The Court's decision came in response to multiple civil appeals arising from writ petitions challenging the acquisition. The bench, comprising Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, highlighted the need for the State to consider future development and public interest when acquiring land for residential and commercial purposes. The judgment raises concerns over arbitrary land releases and emphasizes the State's duty to utilize acquired lands for intended purposes.

The Court observed, "The State shall take care in the future and must use the lands acquired for the purpose for which they were acquired, otherwise the object and purpose of acquiring the land will be frustrated." It criticized the State's arbitrary release of lands in favor of influential individuals and highlighted the importance of public interest over individual interests.

The case involved the acquisition of land measuring 46.49 acres in Sector 11, Kurukshetra, by the Haryana Urban Development Authority. The State had released a major chunk of the acquired land in previous cases, leaving only small plots under acquisition. The Court emphasized that while some lands were released, the State failed to utilize the acquired land for the intended residential and commercial development.

Notably, the judgment addressed specific cases where the State refused to release the acquired land. In one case, where the land was already utilized for sewage lines with an investment of approximately Rs. 17 crores, the Court upheld the State's decision not to release the land, highlighting the potential adverse consequences if the release were allowed. Similarly, in another case where the land was required for road widening, the Court held that the State's decision to retain the land for public infrastructure purposes was justified.

The Supreme Court's decision dismissed one appeal while allowing the others. It upheld the High Court's order to release the land in question from acquisition in one case. However, it quashed the release orders in the remaining cases, emphasizing the importance of public interest and the State's responsibility as the guardian of public welfare.

Date of Decision: February 24, 2023

State of Haryana & Ors.   VS Niranjan Singh & Ors. Etc

Latest Legal News