Rajeev vs State Of U. P. Thru Chief Secy

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 Supreme(All) 1694

PANKAJ MITHAL, PRAKASH PADIA
Rajeev – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru Chief Secy – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Shiv Kant Mihsra, Adv., Ramendra Pratap Singh, Adv., M.J. Akhtar, Adv., V.M. Zaidi, Adv., Shivam Yadav, Adv., Pankaj Dubey, Adv., Adarsh Bhushan, Adv., Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Adv., Shiv Kant Mishra, Adv., Randhir Jain, Adv., Rajesh Kr Dubey, Adv., Vijay Shyam Bhasker, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

1. All these 11 writ petitions relate to the acquisition of land of village Begumpur, Pargana Dankaur, Teshil Sadar, District Gautam Buddh Nagar.

2. The State of U.P. vide notification dated 07.11.2007 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") proposed to acquire 108.233 hectares of land of the aforesaid village for the planned industrial development through New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA).

3. In issuing the aforesaid notification, the State Government opined that as there is urgency for acquisition and the provisions of sub-section (1) and (2) of Section 17 are applicable, the holding of an enquiry or hearing of objections to the proposed acquisition as provided under Section 5-A of the Act be dispensed with by virtue of powers conferred under sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Act.

4. The aforesaid notification was followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act dated 17.03.2008 which stated that the land is required for the planned development in district Gautam Buddh Nagar through NOIDA.

5. The

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 Supreme(All) 1694

PANKAJ MITHAL, PRAKASH PADIARajeev – AppellantVersusState Of U. P. Thru Chief Secy – Respondent

Cases Referred (5)

PANKAJ MITHAL, PRAKASH PADIA
Rajeev – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru Chief Secy – Respondent