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

2016 Supreme(SC) 239

KURIAN JOSEPH, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
Shakuntala Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

Kurian, J.

1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The appellants are aggrieved since their request for release of 1.23 acres of land falling in Khasra No. 23/8/1, 8/2, 9/2, 12/2 and 13/1 in village Sahaul, Tehsil and District Gurgaon and .25 acres of land falling I Khasra No. 23/10/1 in the same village has been rejected.

3. Placing reliance on the letter of the Finance Minister of Haryana, for releasing lands coming under Lal Dora, the appellants approached the High Powered Committee. It appears that the High Powered Committee turned down the request on the ground that possession of the property had already been taken, pursuant to Award passed on 12.3.2004 and that the same had already been handed over to Haryana Urban Development Authority (in short 'the HUDA'). That decision of the High Powered Committee was challenged before the High Court leading to the impugned judgments.

4. The High Court endorsed the view taken by the High Powered Committee and has held that once the acquired land has already been taken possession of, there is no question of release under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short 'the Act').

5. Learned counsel appearing for t





















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