B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, V. N. MEHROTRA
GORAKHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY GORAKHPUR – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT JUDGE, GORAKHPUR – Respondent
( 1 ) A common question arises in this bunch of writ petitions. It is whether the company or the authority for whose benefit a land is being acquired by the Government is entitled to apply for impleading itself in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and whether it can be so impleaded by the civil court.
( 2 ) AT the instance of the writ petitioner, the Gorakhpur Development Authority, Gorakhpur, the Government notified certain lands in village Rampur and other villages under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. Proceedings were accordingly taken and award passed. Possession of the land was also taken and delivered to the Authority. Not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, the owners of the land applied for making a reference to the civil court under Section 18 of the Act, which was done. One of such reference is L. A. Reference No. 67/87 (concerned in C. M. W. P. No. 22107 of 1987 ). In this reference, the Gorakhpur Development Authority applied for impleading itself as a party respondent. Its case was that since the land is being acquired for its purpose and also because whatever compensation is pay
State of Orissa v. Amanrendra Pratap Singh
Chimanlal Hargovinddas v. S.L.O.
Himalaya Tiles and Marble (P) Ltd. v. Francis Victor Coutinho
U.P. Road Transport Corporation v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, U.P. Lucknow.
Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad v. Chandulal Shamaldas Patel
referred to : Neelgangabai v. State of Karnataka
Santosh Kumar v. Central Warehousing Corpn.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.