Dismissed

Janmanas Kalyan Seva Trust Thru. Member Aniruddha Prasad Upadhayay v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways New Delhi and 2 Others

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2024/1003/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Chief Justice's Court dismissed a PIL filed by a Trust seeking directions for compensation and resolution of discrimination in land acquisition. The Bench held that the petition cannot be countenanced where the landholders have already invoked arbitration jurisdiction under applicable laws.

What did the court decide?

The petition filed by the Trust was dismissed.

Janmanas Kalyan Seva Trust Thru. Member Aniruddha Prasad… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:77644-DB

¶2

Chief Justice's Court

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1003 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Janmanas Kalyan Seva Trust Thru. Member Aniruddha Prasad Upadhayay Respondent :- Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Road Transport And Highways New Delhi and 2 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Suphal, Ashwini Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I., Isha Mittal (A.C.S.C.), Abhishek Pathak, Ashwani Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

This petition, purportedly in the nature of public interest litigation, has been filed by the Trust, inter alia , seeking direction to decide the pending arbitration proceedings, to pay fair and legal compensation of land acquired of the various land holders of District Ambedkar Nagar along with solatium and interest. Further prayer has been made to resolve all discrimination of land acquisition under the applicable laws.

¶7

A perusal of the record indicates that land was acquired for National Highway by issuing notification dated 15.06.2012 under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 ('Act') after undertaking procedure as prescribed under Section 3B of the Act, whereafter, it is indicated in para-20 of the petition, that most of the land holders filed arbitration proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which all have been decided. Whereafter prayer has been made to invoke provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 to indicate that fair compensation should be paid to the land holders.

¶8

A query was put to the counsel for the petitioner, whether the land holders, who have already invoked the jurisdiction under the Act of 1956, whether they have approached the petitionerTrust, the answer is being no and that the petition has been filed for safeguarding their interest.

¶9

We are firmly of this opinion that despite the fact that in petitions, filed in public interest, the issue of locus standi may not be very relevant, however, in cases where the petitioner is seeking to interfere where the parties have already invoked the jurisdiction of authorities under the relevant law, the filing of the petition of the present nature at the behest of the petitioner cannot be countenanced.

¶10

We do not find any reason to entertain the petition of present nature, the same is, therefore, dismissed.

¶11

Order Date :- 23.11.2024 Mukesh Pal/Manish Kr.

¶12

(Jaspreet Singh, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)

¶13

Digitally signed by :- MUKESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Janmanas Kalyan Seva Trust Thru. Member Aniruddha Prasad Upadhayay v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways New Delhi and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janmanas Kalyan Seva Trust Thru. Member Aniruddha Prasad Upadhayay v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways New Delhi and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Desh Raj Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Irrigation and Water Resources Deptt. Govt. U.P. Lko. and Ors.

Ajeet Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies Lko. and 3 Others

Anupam Agarwal Vs M/S Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited Thru. Its Director New Delhi and 3 Others

Anurag Sharan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Agriculture U.P. Lko. and 6 Others

Manzar Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planning Lko. and 8 Others

Janmanas Kalyan Seva Trust Thru. Member Aniruddha Prasad Upadhayay vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways New Delhi and 2 Others