Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V.MENON, J
Kochi Selam Petroleum Gas Pipeline Surakshithawa Nashtaprihara Janakeeya Samithi – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[WP(C) Nos.3256/2019 and 12196/2019]
These writ petitions pertain to the interpretation of the various provisions of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) and the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules’) made thereunder, with specific reference to the right of the 4th respondent in W.P(C) No.3256 of 2019 to lay pipelines through the properties in question. The 1st petitioner in W.P(C) No.3256 of 2019 is stated to be a Society, wherein petitioners 2 to 5 are members. It is stated that the 4th respondent – a Private Limited Company has been trespassing into the property of the members of the 1st petitioner Society like petitioners 2 to 5 for laying pipelines for the transportation of Liquefied Petroleum Gas(LPG) from Kochi to Tamil Nadu. The 4th respondent Company is stated to be a joint venture of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) and Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL), respondents 5 and 6 in the writ petition. The pipeline is stated to start from Kochi to Salem, Tamil Nadu. 2. The petitioners con
The right of user under the Petroleum Act can vest in multiple entities, and landowners are entitled to compensation for damages despite prior vesting.
Right of user acquired under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines Act permits subsequent pipeline projects without new notifications if they are connected.
when a statutory forum is created by law for redressal of grievances, a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution should not ordinarily be entertained ignoring the statutory prescription, m....
Point of law: The provisions of Section 5 and 6 of PMP Act would categorically show that the legislature attached much importance to the objections of the owner of the land in respect of acquisition ....
Point of law: Thus, we have a scenario where, on the one hand, invocation of urgency provisions under Section 17 of the Act and dispensing with the right to file objection under Section 5A of the Act....
The court upheld the constitutionality of Section 10(4) of the PMP Act, affirming that compensation provisions are reasonable and do not violate property rights under Article 300-A.
Acquisition of Land - Larger public purpose of a railway project would not be served if the notification under Section 20-A is quashed and the public purpose of the acquisition is the construction an....
The availability of a statutory remedy under the Petroleum and Mineral Pipelines [Acquisition of Right of User in Land] Act, 1962 for redressal of grievances regarding compensation for land acquisiti....
The court upheld the legality of the gas pipeline acquisition, emphasizing public interest and proper procedural adherence by the competent authority.
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
