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

1981 Supreme(AP) 111

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY
P. Appalamurthy – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THESE four writ petitions, which involve a common question of law, can be dealt with and disposed of together. In all these four writ petitions, notifications issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act are being challenged, inter alia, on the ground that the Land Acquisition Officer has taken an inordinately and unreasonably long time for passing the award; or that no award has been passed in spite of lapse of such a long time, as the case may be.

( 2 ) SO far as W. P. No. 3907/1980 is concerned, the notification under Section 4 (1) was issued on 29-7-1971. Enquiry under Section 5-A was held, and the declaration under Section 6 was made on 7-12-1972. Then, after a delay of about three years, notices under Section 9 (3) and Section 10 were issued on 18-11-1975. The award was, however, passed only on 29-4-1980. Meanwhile, this writ petition was filed on 28-4-1980, and admitted on 29-4-1980. So far as W. P. No. 2715/79 is concerned, the notification under Section 4 (1) is dated 29-8-1968, and the declaration under Section 6 is dated 18-1-1970. Notices under Section s 9 (3) and 10 were issued even in Feb. , 1970 itself, but the award came to be p














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