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.

Table of Content
1. claim for quashing notifications under the land acquisition act. (Para 1)
2. arguments on discriminatory acquisition and inadequate compensation for existing structures. (Para 2 , 4 , 5)
3. effect of petitioners' acquiescence and claim abandonment. (Para 6 , 7)
4. finality of acquisition proceedings after 24 years and implications of delay and laches. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
5. dismissal of writ petition due to lack of merit. (Para 11)
6. affirmation of notifications and awards related to the land acquisition. (Para 12)

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 acquisi