Allowed

Krishan Kumar and Ors. v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC22 Nov 2017CW/4818/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of a writ petition holding that acquisition proceedings initiated under a 2003 notification stood lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, as governed by a preceding decision of its own.

What did the court decide?

The acquisition proceedings initiated under the notification dated 04.03.2003 stand lapsed.

Krishan Kumar and Ors. Vs State and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4818 / 2007

¶3

1 Krishan Kumar, Age 50 years,

¶4

2 Naresh Kumar

¶5

Arun Kumar

¶6

Ram Gopal

¶7

Rajesh Kumar sons of Late Shri Som Prakash

¶8

Smt Pushpa Devi Wife of Shri Som prakash By caste Agrawal, Resident of 132 P, Block, Sri Ganganagar

¶9

7 Sat Pal Son of Shri Chirnji Lal jI

¶10

8 Smt. Santosh Kumari W/o Shri Vijay Kumar Both resident of 73, P Block, Sri Ganganagar

¶11

----Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

1 State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶14

The Secretary, Urban Development & Housing Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶15

The Urban Improvement Trust, Sri Ganganagar, through its Secretary.

¶16

The Land Acquisition Officer, UIT, Sri Ganganagar.

¶17

----Respondent

¶18

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Joshi

¶19

Mr. Siddharth Joshi

¶20

Mr. Khet Singh

¶21

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dron Kaushik

¶22

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶23

Order

¶24

22/11/2017

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court rendered in SBCWP

¶26

(2 of 2)

¶27

[CW-4818/2007]

¶28

No.6686/2005 decided on 19.05.2014 Vidhya Sagar vs. State of

¶29

Rajasthan & Ors. reported in 2014 (3) WLC (Raj.) 685.

¶30

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents is not in a position to dispute the above fact that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court rendered in Vidhya Sagar’s case (supra).

¶31

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of Vidhya Sagar’s case (supra). It is ordered that the acquisition proceedings initiated under the notification dated 04.03.2003 stand lapsed under the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency and Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013.

¶32

No order as to costs.

¶33

(VIJAY BISHNOI)J.

¶34

Taruna

Krishan Kumar and Ors. v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishan Kumar and Ors. v. State and Ors.

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

M/S. Dinesh Trading Company Vs State Agriculture and Ors.

Tila Ram Dangi Vs State and Anr.

Bhanwar Lal Vs Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. Ajmer

Sheoganj Coop. Marketing Society Ltd. Vs State and Ors.

Fateh Lal and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Mahesh Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.