Dismissed

Sushma Sharma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC23 Jan 2019WRIC/39845/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition challenging a land acquisition notification by relying on and directing that the petitioners are covered by the benefits in a prior Full Bench judgment (Gajraj case) concerning additional compensation and developed plot allotment.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with directions for payment of additional compensation and allotment of developed abadi plots as per the Gajraj case judgment.

Sushma Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 38

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39845 of 2014

¶3

Petitioner :- Sushma Sharma And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suneel Rai,Sanjay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ramendra Pratap Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Sanjay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Ramendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the Greater Noida Development Authority-respondent no. 2 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no. 1.

¶6

In the present writ petition the petitioners seek to challenge the land acquisition notification issued under Section 4(1)/17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 8.11.2007 and notification under Section 6/17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 7.7.2008 in respect of Khata No. 182, Khasra No. 171, 218M and 487 total area 2.7850 hectare and entire land of Khata No. 184 Khasra No. 170M total area 0.420 hectare situate in Village-Khairpur Gurjar, Tehsil-Dadri, District-Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶7

It is common ground between the parties that the aforementioned land acquisition notification was subject matter of the judgment of this Court in the case of Gajraj and others Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2011 (11) ADJ 1 (FB) .

¶8

Shri Ramendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Greater Noida Development Authority-respondent no. 2 submits that the claim of the petitioners is covered by the said decision and the petition may be disposed of in terms of the directions issued in Paragraph 482 sub-para (3) of the said judgment, which are as follows :

¶9

"3. All other writ petitions except as mentioned above at (1) and (2) are disposed of with following directions:

¶10

(a) The petitioners shall be entitled for payment of additional compensation to the extent of same ratio (i.e. 64.70%) as paid for village Patwari in addition to the compensation received by them under 1997 Rules/award which payment shall be ensured by the Authority at an early date. It may be open for Authority to take a decision as to what proportion of additional compensation be asked to be paid by allottees. Those petitioners who have not yet been paid compensation

¶11

may be paid the compensation as well as additional compensation as ordered above. The payment of additional compensation shall be without any prejudice to rights of land owners under Section 18 of the Act, if any.

¶12

(b) All the petitioners shall be entitled for allotment of developed Abadi plot to the extent of 10% of their acquired land subject to maximum of 2500 square meters. We however, leave it open to the Authority in cases where allotment of abadi plot to the extent of 6% or 8% have already been made either to make allotment of the balance of the area or may compensate the land owners by payment of the amount equivalent to balance area as per average rate of allotment made of developed residential plots."

¶13

The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶14

Order Date :- 23.1.2019 Sunil Kr. Gupta

¶15

(Dr. Y. K. Srivastava, J.) (Abhinava Upadhya, J.)

Sushma Sharma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushma Sharma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munni Devi Vs Additional District Judge and 5 Others

Afsari Begam and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ajeet Kumar Rai and 2 Others Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Hridya Narayan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shri Parvez Hussain Vs Union of India Thru Secy. and 2 Others

Bijendra Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Others