Dismissed

Mohd Irshad v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC27 Apr 2022WPMS/854/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposed of a writ petition for mandamus seeking release of land acquisition compensation. Held that award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act is executable as a decree before the civil court, not via writ. Petition dismissed as not maintainable.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed for being not maintainable; petitioner relegated to civil court for execution.

Mohd Irshad Vs State of Uttarakhand — Land Acquisition | Uttarakhand HC (2022)

¶1

Sl. No	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
			WPMS No.854 of 2022 Hon’ble Sh ar ad Ku m ar Sh ar m a, J. Mr. Siddhartha Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Additional CSC, for the State of Uttarakhand.
			The petitioner to the present writ petition has sought a writ of mandamus for the release of the compensation, which he has claimed for by filing an application on 22.10.2021, which had been as a consequence of the decision taken in the reference proceedings under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, in a Reference Case No.64 of 2014, “Mohd. Irshad Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others”, where it was partly allowed by the judgment dated 09.12.2019. Though the reference award is already under challenge in a pending First Appeal No.76 of 2021, but the pendency of the First Appeal itself will not preclude the petitioner to file an appropriate execution proceedings before the civil court for the execution of award, for the reason being that the award which are rendered under the Land Acquisition Act, as decided in the reference proceedings under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, would be executable as a decree before the competent civil court and

¶2

not by way of a writ of mandamus.
Hence, the petitioner is relegated to
resort to the remedy of execution in accordance
with law.
Thus the writ petition, is dismissed as not
maintainable, for the above reasons.
( Sh ar ad Ku m ar Sh ar m a, J.) 27.04.2022
NR/

Mohd Irshad v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Irshad v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Chinta Rawat

Sovindra Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sara Suhail Vs State of Uttarakhand

Subodh Lal Sah Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma Vs Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University

Anand Prakash Arora Vs Union of India