A.M.KHANWILKAR, R.C.CHAVAN
Damodhar Laxmanrao Kumbodh (deceased) – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
R.C.CHAVAN, J.:- The petitioners seek to have proceedings for acquisition of their lands bearing Survey Nos.25, 2811 and 28/2 at village Bhaipur, Tahsil Arvi, District Wardha quashed on the following grounds:
(i) Petitioners had developed the said lands for being put to non-agricultural use and have entered into registered/unregistered agreements of sale of plots to prospective buyers.
(ii) Public Notice under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was not published as required and record was manipulated to show that it was so published.
(iii) There was no urgency to dispense with enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act by exercising powers under Section 17(4) of the Act and consequently, notification under Section 4 itself was vitiated.
(iv) Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made beyond the period of one year from the last date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act.
(v) The need for which petitioners' lands were sought to be acquired was fully satisfied and therefore, acquisition was unwarranted.
2.The petitioners have raised these challenges in the context of following facts which are either undisputed or cannot be disputed with reference to "reco
Chameli Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Meerut Development Authority Vs. Satbir Singh
PARA UP Jal Nigam Vs. Kalra Properties, (1996)3 SCC 124 6
Oriental Insurance Company Vs. Meena
Union of India Vs. Major Bahadur Singh
Smt. Gunwant Vs. M. C. Bhatinda
Union of India Vs. Mukesh Hans
Union of India Vs. Krishnan Lal, (2004)8 SCC 453 23
State of U.P. Vs. Pista Devi, AIR 1986 S.C. 2025 24
U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Vs. Rishabh Ispat Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.