U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD versus CHANDRA SHEKHAR AND ORS.

U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD versus CHANDRA SHEKHAR AND ORS.

Because Khasra No.673 was neither expressly included in the public notice dated 17.07.2004 nor were individual notices served on the respondents (who were not recorded as tenure-holders immediately prior to issuance), the respondents were denied an effective opportunity to object under Section 29 of the 1965 Act and the acquisition process qua Khasra No.673 is vitiated; since acquisition had not attained finality before 01.01.2014 compensation must be assessed under Section 24(1) of the 2013 Act, and in the circumstances the Court dispensed with Chapter II procedure and directed a prescribed authority process and timelines for notice, objections, award and deposit of compensation.

Parties
Appellant: U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad; Respondent: Chandra Shekhar and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment (wp No.97 of 2014)
Outcome
Appeal disposed of
Legal Topics
Tenure Holders, Pre Acquisition Notice, Opportunity to Submit Objections, Compensation, Procedure Under the 2013 Act, Audi Alteram Partem
Land Acquisition Property Administrative Law Tenure Holders Pre Acquisition Notice Opportunity to Submit Objections Compensation Procedure Under the 2013 Act +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad

Appellant

Chandra Shekhar and Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment (wp No.97 of 2014)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was justified in quashing the acquisition in respect of Khasra No.673 on the ground that tenure-holders were not given opportunity to submit objections under Section 29 of the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965
  2. 2 Whether compensation for the acquired land should be assessed under Section 24(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 given the acquisition had not attained finality before 01.01.2014
  3. 3 Whether the procedural requirements of Chapter II of the 2013 Act (including Social Impact Assessment) should be dispensed with in the circumstances and the manner in which compensation should be determined and disbursed

Ratio Decidendi

Because Khasra No.673 was neither expressly included in the public notice dated 17.07.2004 nor were individual notices served on the respondents (who were not recorded as tenure-holders immediately prior to issuance), the respondents were denied an effective opportunity to object under Section 29 of the 1965 Act and the acquisition process qua Khasra No.673 is vitiated; since acquisition had not attained finality before 01.01.2014 compensation must be assessed under Section 24(1) of the 2013 Act, and in the circumstances the Court dispensed with Chapter II procedure and directed a prescribed authority process and timelines for notice, objections, award and deposit of compensation.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed of

Orders

  • Held that the acquisition process qua Khasra No.673 stands vitiated for non-compliance with the notice and objection procedure under the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965
  • Declared that compensation for Khasra No.673 shall be assessed in accordance with Section 24(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013