Back
SURESHWAR THAKUR, KULDEEP TIWARI
G. D. Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to land acquisition notifications. (Para 1) |
| 2. mandatory award for superstructures. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. previous rulings on award announcements. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. meritless petition dismissal. (Para 6) |
| 5. final order on writ petition. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, J.
The petitioners, who claim themselves to be the owners in possession of pucca residential houses, constructed over land comprised in Khasra No. 49/12/2, 50/14,50/15/1,2 situated in Village Mewala Maharajpur, District Faridabad, have challenged the land acquisition notifications as issued under sections 4 and 6 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act of 1894'), respectively on 25.5.1992 and 3.5.1993, by the respondent-State, on the ground, that the State Government while announcing the award on 1.5.1995, announced it only in respect of "land", whereas, no award was announced for the superstructures constructed on the land in question. The petitioners asserted that it was mandatory to announce the award under Section 11-A of the Act of 1894, qua the superstructures as well and that too within two years from the date of issuance of declaration. Since there was no
Section 11A of Act, Collector has to make an award under Section 11 within a period of two years from date of publication of declaration and if no award is made within that period, entire proceedings....
Section 11 A of 1894 Act read as period within which an award shall be made.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for the acquisition proceedings to lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, the landowner must prove that possession was not taken and compe....
Once possession is taken and an award is passed, challenges to land acquisition proceedings are not maintainable, and remedies for compensation must be sought through reference proceedings.
In case a person has been tendered the compensation as provided under Section 31(1) of the 1894 Act, it is not open to him to claim that acquisition has lapsed under Section 24(2) due to non-payment ....
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
