Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, B.N. SRIKRISHNA, JJ.
RAMKISHAN JAISWAL - APPELLANT
VERSUS
INDIAN INSTITUTION OF TECHNOLOGY AND ANOTHER - RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7874 OF 2004,
DECIDED ON DECEMBER 6, 2004
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 4 and 6 - Controversy regarding portion of land acquired under the Act- Contention that in this area, several persons were staying, having erected huts/structures and they were living as tenants- Held from the records, it was not possible to say as to which portion of the survey number was acquired- Therefore unless that position is clear, it was difficult to say one way or the other- Therefore the City Survey Officer, directed to visits the spot and demarcates the 10 acres 27 guntas, said to have been acquired and make report to the High Court within 8 weeks- Thereafter High Court to dispose of the case according to law[Para 6]
ORDER
1. LEAVE GRANTED.
2. THE CONTROVERSY APPEARS TO BE IN RELATION TO WHICH SPECIFIED PORTION OF 10 ACRES 27 GUNTAS IN OLD PRIVATE SURVEY NO. 22, CORRESPONDING TO GOVERNMENT NEW SURVEY NO. 18, IS ACQUIRED HAVING REGARD TO THE NOTIFICATIONS ISSUED UNDER SECTIONS 4 AND 6 OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 ("THE ACT" FOR BREVITY).
3. IT IS CONTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT THAT IN THIS AREA OF 10 ACRES 27 GUNTAS, SEVERAL PERSONS ARE STAYING, HAVING ERECTED HUTS/STRUCTURES AND THEY ARE LIVING AS TENANTS.
4. THIS POSITION IS SERIOUSLY DISPUTED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS, CONTENDING THAT THOSE PERSONS WHO ARE CLAIMING TO OCCUPY 10 ACRES 27 GUNTAS HAVE NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER; THE OWNERS OF THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ARE NOT BEFORE US AND HAVE NOT CHALLENGED THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS.
5. THE OLD LAND SURVEY NO. 22, CORRESPONDING TO NEW SURVEY NO. 18 MEASURES 20 ACRES 20 GUNTAS OF VILLAGE PAPOLI; FROM THE RECORDS, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO SAY WHICH PORTION OF THE SAID SURVEY NUMBER IS ACQUIRED; UNLESS THAT POSITION IS CLEAR, IT IS DIFFICULT TO SAY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
6. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE THINK IT IS JUST AND APPROPRIATE THAT THE STATUS QUO EXISTING IN RELATION TO 10 ACRES 27 GUNTAS SAID TO HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED, AS TO THE POSSESSION, SHOULD BE MAINTAINED. IN THIS REGARD, IT IS APPROPRIATE THAT THE CITY SURVEY OFFICER, POWAI VISITS THE SPOT AND DEMARCATES THE 10 ACRES 27 GUNTAS, SAID TO HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED HAVING REGARD TO THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED UNDER SECTIONS 4 AND 6 OF THE ACT, AFTER NOTICE TO BOTH THE PARTIES. THE SAID OFFICER SHALL SUBMIT THE REPORT TO THE HIGH COURT WITHIN A PERIOD OF EIGHT WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE COPY OF THIS ORDER, ALONG WITH THE MAP GIVING SPECIFIC PORTION OF THE LAND. THEREAFTER, THE HIGH COURT TO PASS THE APPROPRIATE ORDERS ON MERITS OF THE CASE AND DISPOSE OF THE WRIT PETITION AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE. TILL SUCH TIME, AS ALREADY INDICATED ABOVE, THE STATUS QUO EXISTING AS OF TODAY AS REGARDS THE HUTS/STRUCTURES SHALL BE MAINTAINED.
7. THE IMPUGNED ORDER STANDS MODIFIED ACCORDINGLY. THE APPEAL IS DISPOSED OF.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
