Lalit Kumar vs State of Haryana - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2201

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2201

SURESHWAR THAKUR, KULDEEP TIWARI
Lalit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate; For the Petitioners
For the Respondent: Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl. A.G., Haryana with Mr. Saurabh Mago, DAG, Haryana.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek mandamus to prevent dispossession. (Para 1 , 2)
2. factual background of land acquisition and previous litigation. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. legal questions framed for consideration. (Para 6 , 7)
4. principle of res judicata applicable to successive litigations. (Para 8 , 9)
5. status of petitioners likened to trespassers post-acquisition. (Para 10 , 12)
6. denotification powers of state under section 101-a. (Para 13 , 15)
7. legislative intent of section 24 and rights of landowners. (Para 14 , 16)
8. court's dismissal of the writ petition for lack of merit. (Para 17 , 18)

JUDGMENT

Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, J.

The petitioners, through the instant writ petition, seek issuance of a mandamus upon the respondent(s) concerned, inasmuch as, staying their dispossession from the petition lands, until a final decision is made on their application (Annexure P-8), as moved under Section 101 -A of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 2013'), in accordance with the policy dated 14.9.2018 (Annexure P-11), titled as "The Policy for Return of Un-utilized lands', as well