AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, RAJ RAHUL GARG
Raghbir Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
1. The petitioners pray for quashing the notifications issued under sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (In short, “the Act”) and the award dated 28.2.2016, 27.2.2007 and 3.3.2009, Annexures P.2, P.3 and P.4 respectively.
2. A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in the petition may be noticed. The petitioners were owners in possession of agricultural land situated in Village Jandali, Tehsil and District Ambala. They were cultivating their land. According to the petitioners, by way of fraud, the land had been taken away from them under the threat of acquisition at throwaway price and sold to the private respondents vide sale deeds dated 22.3.2006 and 8.3.2007. The builders/developers were trying to grab the land of the petitioners alongwith other land. On 28.2.2006, notification, Annexure P.2 under section 4 of the Act was issued proposing to acquire the land measuring 165.13 acres of Village Jandali, 50.40 acres of land of Village Kanwali, 33.91 acres of land of Village Saunda and 3.86 acres of land of Village Sarai, Mehdood, District Ambala including the land of the petitioners for development and
Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board & Ors. Vs. T.T. Murali Babu
C. Padma v. Dy. Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu
Dehri Rohtas Light Railway Co. Ltd. v. District Board, Bhojpur
Durga Prashad v. Chief Controller of Imports and Exports
Municipal Council Ahmednagar v. Shah Hyder Beig
Star Wire (India) Ltd. v. State of Haryana
State of M.P. v. Nandalal Jaiswal
State of Maharashtra V. Digambar
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.