SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 1489

FAIZAN UDDIN, G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY
Meerut Development Authority: Mohd. Ali – Appellant
Versus
Satbir Singh: State Of U. P. – Respondent


ORDER

Substitution allowed.

Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.

2. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the "Act") was published on June 11, 1985. The Government also exercised the power under Section 17(4) of the Act and dispensed with the enquiry under Section 5-A and had the declaration under Section 6 published on June 13, 1985. The publication of substance of the notification in the local newspapers came to be made on July 25, 1985. In August 1985, the respondents filed a batch of writ petitions in the High Court impugning the validity of the notification under Section 4(1) and of the declaration under Section 6 on six grounds. Five of the grounds raised by the respondents were negatived by the High Court as not sustainable but declaration under Section 6 was quashed on the ground that after the Amendment Act 68 of 1984 had come into force w.e.f. September 24, 1984, the simultaneous publication of the declaration under Section 6 along with publication of notification under Section 4(1) was invalid in law. They relied upon the judgment of this Court in State of U.P. & Ors. v. Radhey Shyam Nigam & Ors. etc.1. The respondents f


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top