SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(All) 241

R.M.SAHAI, B.L.YADAV
RAM PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Prem Prokash, Q.N.Verma

B. L. YADAV, J.

( 1 ) WHETHER the Special Land Acquisition Officer/collector, Allahabad has exercised his power for acquisition of land and for issuance of notification dated 9-12-87, published in the newspaper dated 20-12-87 (Annexure-2 to the petition ). Under Section 4 (1) read with Section 17 (4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short the Act), dispensing with the provisions of Section 5a of the Act in good faith and if not, whether such notification was a colourable exercise of power or fraud on executive power and exercise of such power was vitiated, and whether the right of summary hearing under Section 5a of the Act could be dispensed with under the circumstances of the case, are the short questions of law for our consideration in this petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a relief for a writ of certiorari for quashing the notification dated 9-12-87/20-12-87 (Annexure-2) issued under Section 4 read with Section 17 (4) the Act.

( 2 ) THE counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and learned counsel for the parties agreed that the writ petition may be decided on merits. We accordingly proceed to decide it on































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top