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

1996 Supreme(AP) 803

B.S.A.SWAMY
Sur Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Special Deputy Collector (LA), Medak – Respondent


B. S. A. SWAMY, J.

( 1 ) IN this writ petition a question of public importance i. e. , whether the existence of an alternative remedy by way of execution proceedings deter this Court in directing the Government to pay the enhanced compensation forthe compulsory acquisition of the lands belonging to the petitioners in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India arises for consideration.

( 2 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government pleader for Land Acquisition.

( 3 ) ADMITTEDLY, the lands belonging to the petitioners along with others were acquired for construction of Singo or Project in the year 1982 by issuance of a draft notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition act (herein after referred as the Act ) published in the A. P. Gazette on 13-07-1982. By invoking the urgency clause, the respondents have taken possession of the lands dispensing with 5 (a) inquiry under the act. The respondents passed award on 19-12-1985 and on an application filed by the petitioners a reference was made to Civil court under Section 18 of the Act for enhanced compensation. The District Judge, medak in O.










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