INDERJEET SINGH
Om Prakash – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER
1. With the consent of both the parties the matter is heard finally.
2. The prayer made by the petitioners in the present writ petition reads as under:-
i) quashing and setting-aside the award dated 03/08/2012 (Annexure-6) being contrary to law;
ii) declaring the notification dated 27/01/2009 under Section 4 and declaration dated 28/06/2010 under Section 6 of the Act of 1894 to be void ab-initio, illegal so far as it relates to the land of the petitioner;
iii) quashing and setting-aside the entire land acquisition proceedings in pursuance to the notification dated 27/01/2009, declaration dated 28/06/2010 and award dated 03/08/2012 and the land of the petitioner be left out from the acquisition;
iv) awarding any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court, may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in favour of the petitioner.
v) awarding cost in favour of the petitioner.'
3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents-State in
Munshi Singh vs. Union of India MANU/SC/0517/1972 : (1973) 2 SCC 337
The court established that adherence to procedural fairness and the right to a hearing are fundamental in land acquisition processes under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
The court emphasized that proper procedural safeguards, including meaningful hearings and recommendations, are essential in land acquisitions under the Land Acquisition Act, affirming that violation ....
The Land Acquisition Officer's failure to independently assess objections vitiates the acquisition process, which must comply with statutory requirements including Section 5A of the Land Acquisition ....
In terms of Section 5A, any person interested in any land notified under Section 4(1) may, within 30 days from the date ofpubiication ofthe notification, submit objection in writing against the propo....
If there is failure to publish notification in two daily newspapers, notification and consequential proceedings for acquiring land would stand vitiated for non-compliance of essential conditions of S....
Objections confined to compensation do not trigger Section 5A protections, which are exclusive to acquisition legality; statutory remedies for compensation must be pursued separately.
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.
The main legal point established in the given judgment is that the Collector failed to adhere to the mandate of Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the objections were disposed of impro....
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.