eng
competition

Text Practice Mode

My first order8

created Jul 25th, 11:19 by pankajsrivastava


1


Rating

467 words
18 completed
00:00
Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.
Hon'ble S.U. Khan, J.
Hon'ble V.K. Shukla, J.
(Delivered by Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.)
Large scale acquisition of agricultural and Abadi land of farmers of
different villages of Greater Noida and Noida of District Gautam Buddha
Nagar in the name of planned industrial development is the subject matter of challenge in these 471 writ petitions. These writ petitions have been placed
before this Full Bench under orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice dated
6.8.2011 on a reference made by a Division Bench in writ petition No. 37443
of 2011 and other connected matters. Writ petition No. 37443 of 2011
challenges the notifications dated 12.3.2008 issued under section 4 read with
Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of Land Acquisition Act and notification dated
30.6.2008 by which declaration was made for acquisition of 589.188 hectares
land of village Patwari. Similar notifications under section 4 read with Sections
17(1), 17(4) and Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act were issued with
regard to different villages. Several writ petitions were filed challenging the
land acquisition which writ petitions came for hearing before the Division
Bench on 26.7.2011.
One of the submissions made before the Division Bench was that the
State had wrongly invoked the provisions of Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the
Land Acquisition Act hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’ and the right of objection
under section 5A was wrongly dispensed with hence, the entire acquisition
proceedings deserved to be set aside. The petitioners placed reliance on a
Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 19.7.2011 passed in writ petition
No. 17068 of 2009 Harkaran Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others in which
judgment the Division Bench of this Court held that invocation of the
provisions of Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act was not justified and relying
on the judgment of the apex Court in Radhey Shyam Vs. State of U.P.
reported in (2011) 5 Supreme Court Cases 533 and judgment of the apex
Court dated 6.7.2011 in Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority vs. Devendra Kumar reported in 2011 (6) ADJ 480 quashed the
notification dated 12.3.2008 and 30.6.2008. Learned Counsel for the State
refuting the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners relied on
another Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 25.11.2008 in writ
petition No. 45777 of 2008 Harish Chand and others Vs. State of U.P.
and others in which judgment invocation of Section 17(1) and 17(4) was
upheld and the writ petition was dismissed in which same notifications dated
12.3.2008 and 30.6.2008 were under challenge.
Faced with large number of writ petitions challenging the land
acquisition by farmers of different villages of Greater Noida and Noida and noticing two conflicting views expressed by two different Division Benches on
the same notifications, the Division Bench passed following order on
26.7.2011.
 

saving score / loading statistics ...