Court dismissed petitioner's writ petition seeking compensation for land acquisition. Relief denied because revenue records did not show petitioner as owner of the khasra number for which compensation was claimed.
Petition dismissed; no compensation direction granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Chief Justice's Court Serial No. 25
**HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD *****
WRIT - C No. - 3295 of 2022
Moti Lal .....Petitioner
Through :- Mr. Manoj Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Pankaj Dubey, Advocate
v/s
Union of India and others .....Respondents Through :- Mr. A.P. Paul, Standing Counsel, Shiv Kumar Singh, Advocate
CORAM : HON'BLE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, JUDGE
ORDER
(Piyush Agrawal, J.) (Rajesh Bindal, C.J.)
Allahabad 20.04.2022 Amit Mishra/Rahul Dwivedi
Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No
Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.04.22 14:12:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether direction to pay compensation for acquisition of khasra no. 627 can be granted when petitioner is not shown as owner in revenue records.
Whether ownership claim by non-record owner is maintainable in constitutional petition for compensation.
Whether petition for compensation against non-recorded owner should be dismissed.
Moti Lal
Union of India
Rajesh Bindal
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
