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

2007 Supreme(SC) 341

S.B.SINHA, MARKANDEY KATJU
Mohan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Markandey Katju, J. — Leave granted.

2. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) dated 12.4.2005 in Writ Petition No.455 of 2004.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

4. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the award dated 4.2.2003 published by the Special Land Acquisition Officer in respect of Renapur Medium Project at village Talegaon (Ghat). The High Court had dismissed the writ petition and hence this appeal.

5. The short point before us is whether the award was illegal in view of Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

6. The date of last publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Act was 18.2.1999 (in Gazette). The last publication of the declaration under Section 6 of the Act was 28.2.2000 whereas the award was published on 4.2.2003. According to the learned counsel for the appellant the award ought to have been published on or before 28.2.2000 which was the date of the last declaration under Section 6 of the Act. Learned counsel has invited our attention to Section 11A of the Act which states:

“11A. The collector shall make an







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