Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority vs. Devendra Kumar reported in 2011 (6) ADJ 480
Radhey Shyam v. State of U.P. reported in (2011) 5 Supreme Court Cases 533
Devender Kumar Tyagi v. State of U.P. (2011) 9 SCC 164, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that urgency clause provided in Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 cannot be lightly invoked, and that there is no justification to invoke urgency in case of proposed development of township in order to do away with the principles of natural justice as embodied in Section 5A of the 1894 Act.
Radhey Shyam v. State of U.P. reported in (2011) 5 Supreme Court Cases 533
Devender Kumar Tyagi v. State of U.P. (2011) 9 SCC 164, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that urgency clause provided in Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 cannot be lightly invoked, and that there is no justification to invoke urgency in case of proposed development of township in order to do away with the principles of natural justice as embodied in Section 5A of the 1894 Act.
Darshan Lal Nagpal v. Government of NCT of Delhi Civil Appeal No. 11169 of 2011 decided on 03.01.2012, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has once again categorically held that compulsory acquisition of the property belonging to a private individual is a serious matter and has grave repercussions on his Constitutional right of not being deprived of his property without the sanction of law – Article 300A and the legal rights.
Royal Orchid Hotels Ltd v. G.Jayarama Reddy reported in (2011) 10 SCC 608 - Colourable exercise of power for land acquisition for corporates
Devinder Singh & Others vs State Of Punjab & Others on 12 October, 2007 Appeal (civil) 4843 of 2007 (reported 2008 SCC)
2012 SCCL.COM 311(Case No: Civil Appeal No(s).5712 of 2002)
ReplyDeleteGarg Woollen Pvt.Ltd Appellant(s) versus State of U.P. & Others Respondent(s)
Date of Decision(mm/dd/yy): 7/19/2012.
Judge(s): Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.S. Singhvi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla.
Subject Index: Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — section 4(1) r/w section 17(1) — acquisition of 250 acres land for industrial purpose invoking urgency clause — appeal filed by the appellant for quashing the acquisition of its land — the respondents failed to produce any material to show that the State Government had formed a bonafide opinion on the issue of invoking of the provisions contained in Section 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act — acquisition of the appellant's land quashed — appeal allowed.