Smt. Laxmi Devi v. The State of Haryana & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ss. 4, 6
Judgment
Smt. Laxmi Devi w/o Late Sh. Ajmer Singh VERSUS ….. PETITIONER The State of Haryana and others ….. RESPONDENTS CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Anuj Balian , Advocate, for the petitioner. *** JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL) This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') on 26.09.2007 (P-2) and 25.09.2008 (P-4) respectively. Award in this case was passed on 25.09.2010. It is an admitted fact that after taking note of the objections filed by the petitioner under Section 5-A of the Act, her residential construction was left out of acquisition. The land is going to be acquired for development of a residential colony. The petitioner's contention that her cow shed has not been left out of acquisition, is not acceptable. She has failed to make out her case for discrimination so far as release of her land is concerned. CWP No. 17458 of 2010 2 In view of the Award having been passed, in terms of the ratio of judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay vs. Industrial Development and Investment Company (P) Limited, (1996) 11 SCC 501; Municipal Council, Ahmednagar vs. Shah Hyder Beig, (2000) 2 SCC 48; C.Padma vs. Deputy Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, (1997) 2 SCC 627; Star Wire (India) Ltd. vs. State of Haryana, (1996) 11 SCC 698 and M/s Swaika Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Rajasthan, JT 2008 (2) SC 280, possibly this writ petition cannot be entertained. Dismissed. ( JASBIR SINGH ) JUDGE ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE September 27, 2010
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — ss. 4, 6.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 27 Sep 2010. The bench was JASBIR SINGH, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.