Disposed

Sri Hanuman Mandir Maharishi Nagar Trust v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2018WRIC/15320/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the lapse of land acquisition proceedings due to non-payment of compensation under the 2013 Act. The court directed the State Government to decide expeditiously after hearing parties upon receipt of a representation.

What did the court decide?

Direction to State Government to decide the issue of lapse of acquisition proceedings within three months upon receipt of the petitioner's representation.

Sri Hanuman Mandir Maharishi Nagar Trust Vs State of U.P… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15320 of 2016

¶3

Petitioner :- Sri Hanuman Mandir Maharishi Nagar Trust Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shivam Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

¶5

The petitioner contends that the acquisition proceedings have lapsed under Section 24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the '2013 Act') for the reason that compensation has not been paid to the petitioner.

¶6

It is sought to be contended by Shri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the 'NOIDA') that as there was a dispute as to who would receive the compensation, the matter was referred to the District Judge under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It is also his contention that the amount of compensation has been deposited in the Reference Court and some of the tenure holders have received the compensation.

¶7

Shri Pankaj Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner has, however, submitted that the amount was deposited in the Reference Court after 1 January 2014 and, therefore, no benefit can be taken by the respondents.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has, however, submitted that the issue as to whether the acquisition proceedings would lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act can be examined by a Committee that has been constituted by the State Government under the Government Order dated 30 January 2015.

¶9

In such circumstances when the State Government has constituted a Committee to examine the matter, the matter can be referred to the State Government for taking a decision.

¶10

This petition is, accordingly, disposed of with a direction that in the event petitioner files a representation before the State Government with a certified copy of this order, a decision shall be taken expeditiously and preferably within a period of three

¶11

months thereafter after hearing the parties concerned including the officers of NOIDA.

¶12

Order Date :- 5.1.2018 A. V. Singh

¶13

(Dilip Gupta,J.)

¶14

(Jayant Banerji,J.)

Sri Hanuman Mandir Maharishi Nagar Trust v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Hanuman Mandir Maharishi Nagar Trust v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sardar Husain Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Barkat Ali and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sanjay Kumar Paliwal Vs the Union of India and 5 Others

Sri Ram Mandir Maharishi Nagar Trust Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pawan Kumar Vs Union of India and 5 Ors.

Age of Enlightenment Publication Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others