Back
SURYA KANT, K. V. VISWANATHAN
U. P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad – Appellant
Versus
Chandra Shekhar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SURYA KANT, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant-U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (Board) is aggrieved by the judgment dated 07.10.2015, passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, whereby acquisition in respect of Khasra No.673 (mentioned as plot No. 673 in the impugned judgment), situated within the revenue estate of village Hariharpur, Tehsil and District Lucknow, has been quashed on the ground that the respondenttenure holders were not accorded opportunity to submit objections against the proposed acquisition in accordance with Section 29 of the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 (in short, ‘the 1965 Act’).
3. The 1965 Act was enacted by the State legislature through Act No.1 of 1966 and has, thereafter, been re-enacted by U.P. Act No.30 of 1974, to provide for the establishment, incorporation and functioning of a Housing and Development Board in Uttar Pradesh.
4. Section 28 of the 1965 Act contemplates that when any Housing or Improvement Scheme is framed, the Board shall prepare a notice depicting the boundaries of the area comprised in that Scheme; the details of the land proposed to be acquired and the date by which
Section 24(2) of Act of 2013 does not give rise to new cause of action to question the legality of concluded proceedings of land acquisition. Section 24 applies to a proceeding pending on the date of....
If there is failure to publish notification in two daily newspapers, notification and consequential proceedings for acquiring land would stand vitiated for non-compliance of essential conditions of S....
The court ruled that the Gorakhpur Improvement Trust was validly established and could operate, thus affirming the legality of the land acquisition proceedings under the concerned laws.
The Government cannot cancel a notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act with retrospective effect under Section 21 of the General Clauses Act.
A writ petition challenging dispossession under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act was dismissed due to the petitioner's failure to raise timely claims and the lifting of compensation, which....
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
