Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, SHUBHA METHA
Rajasthan Leather Industries Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To Government, Revenue Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, CJ.
Facts
1. By way of the present special appeals (writs), Rajasthan Leather Industries Limited and the state government assailed the order dated 12.05.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant-company (writ petitioner) was partly allowed. The writ petition came to be disposed of by the learned Single Judge with the following observations:
"11.Considering the aforesaid material aspect of the matter so also the opinion given by the Advocate General as well as the subsequent decision taken by the Ministry of the concerned Department, the instant writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to use and develop land in question for the purpose of establishing Agro Based Food Park. The petitioner would be at liberty to diversify its portfolio but the petitioner would not be allowed to sale/alienate the property in question without permission of the respondents.
12. In case, the petitioner feels aggrieved by any of the actions of the respondent-State, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the Arbitrator for settlement of dispute in terms of the agreement dated 12.11.1992.
13.S
prayer of the petitioners is to restrain the official respondents from granting permission to convert the land from industrial to residential. But, this Court cannot issue such direction restraining ....
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Ravish Agrawal, Sanjay Agrawal For the Respondent : Pushpendra Yadav, R. N. Singh, Akshay Pawar
The resumption of land under Section 3-B cannot be solely based on observations of land lying fallow; substantial evidence of actual non-use for its intended purpose is required.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appeal under Section 20 of the Act of 1975 was not maintainable as the order was passed under Section 9-A, which was non-appealable. The j....
The allotment of land and delivery of possession in favor of the petitioner is a Government Grant within the meaning of the Government Grants Act, 1895. The State is not entitled to resume the land a....
Acquisition proceedings that have attained finality, with compensation paid and possession taken, cannot be challenged after a significant delay. Furthermore, the transfer of acquired land between st....
Administrative authorities must apply the principle of equality under Article 14, ensuring consistent and fair treatment, particularly in cases of similar circumstances and rights related to governme....
Legislation impairing accrued rights of transferees cannot operate retrospectively, protecting vested property rights from legislative re-imposition of restrictions.
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
