Karam Singh vs Union Territory Chandigarh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2289

SURESHWAR THAKUR, KULDEEP TIWARI
Karam Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory Chandigarh – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Ravi Kant Sharma, Advocate; For the Petitioners
Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate with Mr. Parminder Singh Kaul, Advocate for the Respondent No.3.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.

In the instant writ petition, the petitioners claim relief for the quashing of the impugned notifications, which became respectively issued under sections 4 and 6 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1894'), notifications whereof are respectively embodied in Annexures P-1 and P-2.

2. The petitioners claim, that they have raised small houses on the acquired lands, and, in case the notifications (supra) are not quashed, they would be rendered homeless. Moreover, they contend, that the respondents have adopted a discriminatory approach, in yet continuing to subject their properties to acquisition, despite and especially when in respect of other properties located in the similar zone or area, they have chosen to release such properties from acquisition.

3. The notifications (supra) were respectively issued in the years 1990 and 1991, and, the public purpose for which they became issued, thus appertained to the development of residential-cum-commercial complex, Scheme No.3 by the Notified Area Committee, Manimajra, Union Territory, Chandigarh. In pursuance to the making of the said notifications, an award bearing No.