of 2023 (@SLP(C)
No 28803/2018)
Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@SLP(C)
No 30435/2018) Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@SLP(C) No 21301/2022) Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@SLP(C) No 20859/2022) Civil Appeal No.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/criminal/analysis-of-bail-granting-criteria-in-criminal-cases/
It thus stands established that one of the statutory stipulation contained in Section 24(2) re: non-payment of compensation or its deposit for a period of five years or more from the date of passing of the award till the new Act came into force stands indisputably established in these cases.
It is also the case on behalf of the State of Haryana that in fact the possession of the lands in question acquired was already taken over and in most of the cases by drawing the Rapat/Rooznamcha and therefore, upon taking the possession the lands vested with the State Government. Tulsi, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the original land owner – Hira Singh in SLP No 20857/2022 has relied upon some documents produced along with the application that in fact the proposal for realignment of the road is going on and therefore, the purpose for which the land is acquired, the land is not needed.
Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and having gone through the impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court, more particularly, paragraph 21 of the impugned order and as it is the case on behalf of the State of Haryana that the possession of the lands in question was taken over by preparing Rapat/Rooznamcha and in one case, the possession could not be taken due to stay order/pending litigation, the matters are required to be remanded to the High Court to decide the writ petitions afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits taking into consideration the law laid-down by this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority (supra).
In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, without further entering into the merits of the cases and without expressing anything on the merits in favour of either of the parties, we set aside the impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court and remit the matters back to the High Court to decide the same afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits and taking into consideration the law laid down by this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority (supra). 2966-2967/2021 and other allied Special Leave Petitions, liberty is reserved in favour of the original writ petitioners to make a representation to the State Government in terms of Section 101-A of the Act, 2013, as applicable to the State of Haryana, to be made within a month from today if they so desire, which may be decided in accordance with law and on its own merits within a period of four months thereafter, for which we have not expressed anything in favour of either of the parties. No costs.
Case Title: THE STATE OF HARYANA Vs. HIRA SINGH (2023 INSC 477)
Case Number: C.A. No.-003286-003286 / 2023
