Dismissed

Paras Mal v. State and Anr.

Rajasthan HC10 Apr 2008CW/2362/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging land acquisition notification and order recorded after petitioners objection. Court dismissed petition finding no illegality in notification but directed L.A.O. to consider representation afresh.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner liberty to submit representation to Land Acquisition Officer for filing in regard to order dated 22.01.2008 if any such representation is made then it is expected from the Land Acquisition

Paras Mal Vs State and Anr. — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2008)

¶1

¶2

S/3

¶3

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 2362/2008 [PARAS MAL VS. STATE & ORS.] Dated : 10.04.2008

¶4

HON'BLE MR. MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, J.

¶5

Mr.Indresh Sharma for the petitioner.

¶6

¶7

This writ petition is directed against the Notification for acquisition of land dated 06.11.2007 and also the order dated 22.01.2008.

¶8

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that despite of submission of objection by the petitioner at Annex.10, he was not provided even opportunity of hearing by the Land Acquisition Officer and in the order dated 22.01.2008, it was wrongly recorded that petitioner was heard.

¶9

In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the Notification under Section 4 be set aside so as the order dated 22.01.2008.

¶10

So far as the quashing of the Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Officer is concerned, no case is made out so as to show that there exist any illegality in issuance of the said Notification. So far as justification for acquisition of land is concerned, that cannot be looked

¶11

¶12

into by this Court at this stage more so it being an administrative decision unless it is shown otherwise to be illegal or malicious, the interference of this Court is not warranted in the matter of acquisition. So far as passing of the order dated 22.01.2008 is concerned, if the order contends a fact contrary to what has been asserted by the learned counsel for the petitioner then before filing of the writ petition, petitioner ought to have give a representation making out his grievances as otherwise raised herein and more specifically containing that fact that without hearing on merit the objection so submitted it has been recorded that the petitioner was heard and thereby the order dated 22.01.2008 passed.

¶13

In view of the above I do not find any merit in the petition preferred by the petitioner, the same is dismissed. However, while dismissing the writ petition, the petitioner is liberty to submit representation to the Land Acquisition Officer in regard to order dated 22.01.2008 if any such representation is made then it is expected from the Land Acquisition Officer to take it considering it afresh and pass an appropriate order.

¶14

(MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI), J.

¶15

mamta

Paras Mal v. State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paras Mal v. State and Anr.

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

Similar cases

Harsore Krishak Seva Sah. Sansthan Vs Uco Bank and Anr.

Raj Kumar and Anr. Vs State and Ors.

Ram Chandra Vs B.O.R.,Raj.Ajmer and Ors.

Smt. Kamla Devi Vs Madhav Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Smt. Sapna Dadhich Vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Anr.

Sawai Singh Vs B.O.R.,Ajmer and Ors.