Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M. S. SONAK, JITENDRA JAIN
Dnyaneshwar Lingappa Bhosale (Since Decd) – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.S. SONAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. These petitions were admitted on 14 August 2018 and, upon completion of the pleadings, finally heard on 03 January 2025.
3. Learned counsel for the parties agree that common issues of law and fact arise in these three petitions, and therefore, they could be disposed of by common order. Learned counsel for the parties submit that Writ Petition No. 5109 of 2017 may be treated as the “lead petition.”
4. In the lead Writ Petition No. 5109 of 2017, the petitioner has sought the following substantive reliefs:
(B) This Hon’ble court may be pleased to issue the Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction d
Requisition of land cannot exceed statutory limits and must be quashed if continued illegally; acquisition must follow due process.
Failure to specify public purpose in a land acquisition notification renders it void ab initio.
The court established that non-compliance with Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act invalidates acquisition proceedings, emphasizing the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice.
Delay is fatal in questioning land acquisition proceedings, and courts cannot invalidate acquisition which stood concluded due to delay and laches.
Land Acquisition - Compulsory acquisition of land - Quash of order – Acquiescence would be a conduct where a party is sitting by when another is invading his rights and acquiescence must be such as t....
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
