Land and Building Department vs Manish Sethi

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 131

M. R. SHAH, C. T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KAROL
Land and Building Department – Appellant
Versus
Manish Sethi – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Atul Kumar, AOR Ms. Sweety Singh, Adv. Ms. Archana Kumari, Adv. Mr. Rahul Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Avs Kadyan, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 6060 of 2014 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act 2013”) the Land and Building Department and the Land Acquisition Collector have preferred the present appeal.

2. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, it is apparent that the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Another vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Others, (2014) 3 SCC 183 and on the ground that the compensation has not been tendered and/or paid to the landowners. However, it is required to be noted that before the High Cou