Disposed
Jaideep Kumbhat v. Union of India and Ors.
Rajasthan HCCW/4341/2017
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B.…
What the court decided
AI extract
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B.…
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4341 / 2017 Jaideep Kumbhat S/o Shri Dashrathmal, Aged About 48 Years, By Caste Oswal, R/o 6, Roop Rajat, Sarovar Amritnagar, Pal Road, Jodhpur
----Petitioner
----Respondents _____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Swami For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Dave Mr. B.P. Bohra Mr. Rajat Arora for Mr. Sanjeet Purohit Mr. Ankur Mathur
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI Judgment / Order
26/07/2017
Learned counsels for the parties have submitted that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court rendered in Man
Singh & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13114/2016) decided on 27.03.2017.
(2 of 4)
A Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Man Singh (supra) has passed the following decision :-
“1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking directions to the respondents to re-determine the amount of compensation and other benefits awarded by the competent authority for the land acquired, while complying with the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short “the Act of 2013”).
(3 of 4)
the competent authority was required to determine the compensation payable to the petitioners for the land acquired, taking into consideration the components as set out in the First Schedule of the Act of 2013.
(4 of 4)
Learned counsels for the parties have submitted that in the present case also the award has been passed after 31.12.2014 and therefore, the present case is also governed by the decision
referred above.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
In view of the above submissions made by learned counsels for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 27.03.2017 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court rendered in Man Singh’s case (supra).
Stay petition also stands disposed of.
(VIJAY BISHNOI)J.
Gaurav/294
2 issues framed by the court
Whether compensation for land acquired under National Highways Act 1956 but awarded after 31 December 2014 is governed by the 2013 Act.
Whether the competent authority is required to re-determine compensation in accordance with the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 201
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Man Singh & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.Followed¶11
_Man Singh & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13114/2016)_
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Jaideep Kumbhat
Union of India
Chief Engineer National Highway
Prescribed Authority (Land Acquisition)
Project Director NHAI
Vijay Bishnoi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court