Disposed

Chattar Singh Son of Shri Chunna v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC20 Sept 2024CW/9829/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought directions to hand over 25% developed land as compensation for land acquired in 2010, opting for land instead of money. Due to a dispute among co-sharers, the court disposed of the petition conditionally, granting liberty to the petitioner to submit affidavits proving no dispute over part of the land and requesting allotment without claiming compensation for that share.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file representation with affidavits of co-sharers showing no dispute over half the land; authorities to consider within four weeks and act within six months.

Chattar Singh Son of Shri Chunna Vs the State of Rajasthan — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:39800]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9829/2021

¶4

Chattar Singh Son Of Shri Chunna, Aged About 70 Years, Resident Of Salarpur, Tehsil Tizara, District Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Deputy Secretary, Department Of Industries, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

Rajasthan State Industrial Investment And Development Corporation Limited (Riico Limited), Through Its Managing Director, Office At Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

¶9

The Land Acquisition Officer, Rajasthan State Industrial Investment And Development Corporation Limited (Riico Limited), Office At Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

¶10

The Senior Regional Manager, Rajasthan State Industrial Investment And Development Corporation Limited (Riico Limited), Bhiwadi, Rajasthan.

¶11

Hukum Chand S/o Shri Ratiram, R/o Salarpur, Teh. Tizara, Distt. Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶12

Harchand S/o Shri Ratiram, R/o Salarpur, Teh. Tizara, Distt. Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶13

Smt. Sunita D/o Late Shri Bhullad, Resident Of Village Salarpur, Teh. Tizara, Distt. Alwar (Raj.) Presently Residents Of Jataula, Tehsil Farrukh Nagar, District Gurgaon, Haryana.

¶14

Smt. Anusuiya Wife Of Late Shri Bhullad, Resident Of Village Salarpur, Teh. Tizara, Distt. Alwar (Raj.) Presently Residents Of Jataula, Tehsil Farrukh Nagar, District Gurgaon, Haryana.

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Rahul Tiwari For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.N.Kumawat with Mr.Naval Kishore Saini

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:39800]

[CW-9829/2021]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

¶21

Order

¶22

20/09/2024

¶23

This petition is filed seeking directions to the respondents to hand over possession of the 25% developed land in lieu of the compensation awarded for the land acquired.

¶24

Brief facts are that in the year 2010, acquisition proceedings were initiated for extension of industrial area at KhushKhera, Tehsil Tijara. The order dated 03.08.2012 computing the compensation to be awarded to the petitioner was passed. The grievance raised in the present petition is that the petitioner opted for having alternative land instead of monetary compensation but the needful has not been done.

¶25

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is a dispute vis-a-vis the land acquired amongst the co-sharers and apart from that there is no impediment in allotting the land as per the order dated 03.08.2012.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute is only with regard to half of the land acquired and there is no dispute with regard to the other half.

¶27

Taking into account that there are factual aspects to be gone into, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation along-with the affidavits of the co-sharers to the effect that there is no dispute or litigation pending amongst them qua half of the land acquired. Further that there is no objection to the allotment of 25% of developed land qua half of the acquired land and that the compensation amount shall not be claimed for half of the share.

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:39800]

[CW-9829/2021]

In the eventuality of petitioner filing a representation within four weeks from today, the respondents shall consider it in accordance with law, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the affected party.

¶32

It would be desirable that the decision is taken within six months from the date of receipt of the representation. In case the petitioner is found entitled for allotment of the 25% of the land, needful shall be done within three months thereafter.

¶33

(AVNEESH JHINGAN),J

¶34

Monika/172

Chattar Singh Son of Shri Chunna v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chattar Singh Son of Shri Chunna v. the State of Rajasthan

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

Sunil Dutt Bajaj Vs Meenu Bajaj and Anr.

Sunita Nayak W/O Sh. Vinod Nayak Vs State of Rajasthan

Seth Juthalal Education Society Vs the National Council for Teacher Education

Ram Karan Son of Shri Phusa Vs State of Rajasthan

Shyam Lal Vs State Revenu Departmentors

Payal Panwar Daughter of Shri Bajrang Lal Vs State of Rajasthan