SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(P&H) 1644

M.M.KUMAR, JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Rakesh Aggarwal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Judgment

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. The instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for issuance of a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents i.e. State of Haryana, the District Revenue Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Sonepat and the Commissioner and Secretary to Government of Haryana, Town and Country Planning Department, from undertaking any other measure in relation to acquisition proceedings initiated by notification dated 6.5.1982, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, the Act). A further prayer for quashing notification dated 6.5.1982 (P-l), declaration made under Section 6 of the Act, dated 2.5.1985 (P-2) as well as the award dated 1.5.1987 (P-3 Colly) have also been made. It is admitted position that the petitioners had purchased the land after the pronouncement of award from the erstwhile land owners.

2. Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chopra, learned senior counsel for the petitioners has raised the following submissions before us. Firstly, he has submitted that there was no vesting of proprietory rights in the State as no rapat roznamcha was entered in the revenue record, which may constitute the basis for the respondent Sta






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top