Back
SURESHWAR THAKUR, KULDEEP TIWARI
Satnam Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
Since all the above mentioned writ petitions arise from a common notification of acquisition besides when common questions of law and facts are involved thereins, therefore, all the above mentioned writ petitions are taken up together for disposal.
2. Petitioner No.2 in CWP-17464-2007 on the strength of a collaboration agreement dated 2.4.2004 (admittedly entered after issuance of a declaration under Section 6 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1894'), has through filing the instant writ petition(s), thus thrown a challenge, to the land acquisition proceedings which were successfully and legally terminated in the year 2006. It is not in dispute that petitioner No.2 had entered into a collaboration agreement with petitioner No.1, but yet post the issuance of a declaration under Section 6 of the Act of 1894.
3. The core issue which arises for determination, before this Court, is whether the collaboration agreement executed inter-se the land losers, and, the collaborator(s) concerned, rather begets the stain of illegality, thus stemming from the factum of its becoming drawn post the issuance of notification (Supra):-
Post-acquisition, landowners cannot enter into valid agreements regarding the acquired land, as the public interest served by the acquisition prevails over private benefits, rendering such agreements....
Even though there is no period of limitation for filing petitions under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner should approach the Court without loss of time and if there is delay, t....
The power of eminent domain allows the State to lawfully acquire land for public purposes, superseding individual claims of legitimate expectation, especially when justified by ecological and urban p....
The court emphasized the importance of timely challenges to acquisition proceedings and the consequences of delay and laches in approaching the court.
The importance of public purpose in land acquisition, the conclusive and binding effect of previous orders, and the impact of delays and laches in approaching the court.
The conclusive and binding effect of previous verdicts, estoppel, and lack of entitlement based on delayed challenges.
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.
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
