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

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