Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, ANISH KUMAR GUPTA
Rishi Kumar Jain – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. relief sought by petitioners in writ petition. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. arguments by the parishad opposing the writ. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 3. court’s analysis on the series of litigations and their implications. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 34) |
| 4. issues regarding applicability of section 24(2) of the act. (Para 27 , 28 , 30) |
| 5. conclusion affirming dismissal of writ petition. (Para 46 , 48 , 50) |
JUDGMENT :
MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
1. Heard Shri Pramod Jain, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Ram Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Suresh Singh, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel and Shri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for State respondents and Shri Ravi Anand Agarwal, learned counsel for U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad. [Parishad]
2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for following reliefs:-
“(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 6.2.2012 by the respondent no.1 (Annexure-15);
(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the entire acquisition proceeding initiated by Notific
Land acquisition proceedings confirmed despite long history of litigation; procedural rules under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 not applicable to past acquisitions under 1965 Act.
Land Acquisition – Possession not taken - Lapse of proceedings – stale and dead claims cannot be permitted to be canvassed on the pretext of enactment of Section 24
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for lapsing of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, both the conditions of physical possession and payment of compe....
Acquisition of land does not lapse if possession is taken and compensation is deposited; previous participation in proceedings bars new claims, and inordinate delays disqualify relief under Article 2....
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.
The petition under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 must meet the gap period of five years, and the physical possession and compensation tender must be valid. The essentiality of the land for public ....
Land acquisition proceedings are invalid if statutory requirements are not met, particularly regarding notifications and timelines, as established by the Land Acquisition Act and the 2013 Act.
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
