{"id":252214,"date":"2021-08-03T20:00:57","date_gmt":"2021-08-03T14:30:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=252214"},"modified":"2021-08-04T10:04:09","modified_gmt":"2021-08-04T04:34:09","slug":"land-acquisition-dispute","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court:<\/strong> The Division Bench comprising of Rohinton Fali Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ., settled a decade-old land-acquisition dispute by directing NOIDA (New Okhla Industrial Development Authority) to pay compensation to the aggrieved land-owners who were dispossessed of their land by the authority without any land acquisition proceeding and without the authority of law.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>Background <\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Petitioner was the lawful and absolute owner and in possession of total land admeasuring 0.44325 hectares (4432.5 sq. meters) in Khasra No. 135 and 138 in Gautam Budh Nagar. In the year 2010, he was wrongfully and illegally dispossessed from his land by the Respondent without following due process of law and without any land acquisition proceedings. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached the High Court of Judicature of Allahabad and later on to the Supreme Court seeking demarcation and peaceful vacant possession of the Petitioner\u2019s land located inside the Dalit Prerna Sthal developed by the Respondent. The said petition was joined by a similarly placed and aggrieved intervener-petitioner 2, who had also lost his land admeasuring 1.32975 hectares (13,297.5 sq. meters) in Khasa No. 135 and 138 Gautam Budh Nagar, which was wrongfully taken over by the Respondent.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">To unravel the issue, the Supreme Court had appointed Mr. Gaurav Agrawal as Advocate Commissioner to make a site inspection and produce a map stating who was in possession of what portion. Following the report filed by Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, the Bench had directed the ADM, Gautam Budh Nagar to furnish a report of demarcation. The report filed by the ADM made it clear that the parties\u2019 lands had never been acquired and further revealed that NOIDA was indeed in possession of lands in excess of what was acquired under various notifications.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>Final Order of the Court<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">After considering the ADM\u2019s report, the Bench had directed the NOIDA to allot the petitioners appropriate land elsewhere admeasuring the extent to which the petitioner\u2019s and the applicant\u2019s land was taken over by them without authority of law. However, the matter was further contested by the NOIDA.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It was in the abovementioned backdrop that the Bench had appointed a valuer to conduct a valuation exercise on the disputed land and determine the market value as it was in the year of their dispossession; which was determined and even reiterated on being objected by the NOIDA at Rs. 20,000\/- per sq. meter.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Consequently, while disposing of the matter, the Bench had awarded compensation to the petitioners at the rate determined by the valuer. The NOIDA was directed to pay the aforesaid sum to the petitioner and the applicant within a period of eight weeks. Though, the said final order was assailed by NOIDA in a review petition but the same was dismissed.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #008000;\">Contempt Petition<\/span> <\/strong><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The instant contempt petition was filed to highlight wilful non-compliance of the above mentioned final order by the contemnor CEO of NOIDA by sleeping over repeated claim applications made by the petitioners seeking release of the awarded compensation.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In view of the above, the Bench directed NOIDA to release the awarded compensation (Approx 36 crores) in favour of petitioners.[Nayan Tara v. Ritu Maheshwari, Contempt Pet. (C) No. 316\/2021, decided on 30-07-201]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">Kamini Sharma, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Appearance by:<\/strong><\/p>\n<div class=\"page\" title=\"Page 1\">\n<div class=\"layoutArea\">\n<div class=\"column\">\n<pre>For Petitioner(s): Mr. Vijay Hansaria, Sr. Adv.\r\nMr. Sanjay Sarin, Adv.\r\nMr. Mohit Paul, AOR\r\nMr. Pratyush Miglani, Adv.\r\nMr. Nikhil Verma, Adv.\r\n<\/pre>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"column\">\n<pre>Ms. Sunaina Phul, Adv.<\/pre>\n<div class=\"column\">\n<pre>For Respondent(s): Mr. Ravindra Kumar, AOR<\/pre>\n<\/div>\n<pre>Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, AOR\r\n<\/pre>\n<pre>Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR\r\nMr. Mohit Paul, AOR\r\n<\/pre>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court: The Division Bench comprising of Rohinton Fali Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ., settled a decade-old land-acquisition dispute by directing NOIDA <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":251197,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[2728,2723,32974,29785,17721,5363],"class_list":["post-252214","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-compensation","tag-Land_Acquisition","tag-land-owners","tag-law","tag-noida","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.4 (Yoast SEO v27.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Land Acquisition Dispute\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Land Acquisition Dispute\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-08-03T14:30:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-08-04T04:34:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-08-03T14:30:57+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-08-04T04:34:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":550,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/07\\\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png\",\"keywords\":[\"compensation\",\"Land Acquisition\",\"Land Owners\",\"law\",\"NOIDA\",\"Supreme Court\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"Supreme Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/07\\\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-08-03T14:30:57+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-08-04T04:34:09+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Land Acquisition Dispute\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/07\\\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/07\\\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2021\\\/08\\\/03\\\/land-acquisition-dispute\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land | SCC Times","description":"Land Acquisition Dispute","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land","og_description":"Land Acquisition Dispute","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-08-03T14:30:57+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-08-04T04:34:09+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land","datePublished":"2021-08-03T14:30:57+00:00","dateModified":"2021-08-04T04:34:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/"},"wordCount":550,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png","keywords":["compensation","Land Acquisition","Land Owners","law","NOIDA","Supreme Court"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","Supreme Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/","name":"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png","datePublished":"2021-08-03T14:30:57+00:00","dateModified":"2021-08-04T04:34:09+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Land Acquisition Dispute","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png","width":1331,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/03\/land-acquisition-dispute\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Supreme Court directs NOIDA to pay Rs 36 crore compensation in a land acquisition dispute for illegally taking over excess land"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":285689,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/28\/classification-of-pushtaini-and-gair-pushtaini-landholders-bad-in-law-creates-dissonance-between-object-and-effect-of-land-acquisition-act-says-supreme-court-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":252214,"position":0},"title":"Classification of \u2018pushtaini\u2019 and \u2018gair-pushtaini\u2019 landholders bad in law, creates dissonance between Land Acquisition Act&#8217;s object and effect: Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"February 28, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court opined that even if such a classification had a rational nexus to the objective of the notification, the classification must also be legitimized by the parent statute.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-562.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-562.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-562.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-562.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6659,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/05\/28\/appeals-regarding-land-acquisition-in-villages-of-noida-and-greater-noida-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":252214,"position":1},"title":"Appeals regarding Land Acquisition in villages of Noida and Greater Noida, dismissed","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 28, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Dismissing the present appeals filed on the issue of land acquisitions in several villages of Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar and Greater Noida, the 3 Judge Bench comprising of H.L.Dattu, C.J, A.K. Sikri and Arun Mishra, JJ., observed that the Allahabad High Court had studied the ground realities to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Supreme Court&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":297937,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/28\/allahabad-hc-dismisses-contempt-proceedings-noida-ceo-gautam-budh-nagar-dm-land-acquisition\/","url_meta":{"origin":252214,"position":2},"title":"Read why Allahabad HC dismissed contempt proceedings against NOIDA CEO and Gautam Budh Nagar DM in land acquisition case","author":"Apoorva","date":"July 28, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court said that as the compensation has already been assessed by the authorities to the tune of Rs. 1,33,05,600\/-, thus no question arises for interfering for awarding higher compensation","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"allahabad high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":261766,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/15\/no-corporation-planning-authority-can-be-compelled-to-acquire-an-unusable-or-unsuitable-land-and-be-compelled-to-pay-compensation-to-land-owners-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":252214,"position":3},"title":"No Corporation\/Planning Authority can be compelled to acquire an unusable or unsuitable land and be compelled to pay compensation to landowners: SC","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"February 15, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In a case where the Bombay High Court had directed Kolhapur Municipal Corporation to acquire an unusable land under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and compensate the landowners, the bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-82.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-82.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-82.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-82.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-82.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":265118,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/07\/state-cannot-hide-behind-delay-land-owners-get-compensated-a\/","url_meta":{"origin":252214,"position":4},"title":"&#8220;State cannot hide behind delay &#038; laches to evade it&#8217;s responsibility after acquiring land. There cannot be a \u2018limitation\u2019 to doing justice&#8221;, holds SC; Land Owners get compensated after decades","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"April 7, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In a case where the bench of S. Ravindra Bhat* and PS Narsimha, JJ was posed with the question as to whether the State can, merely on the ground of delay and laches, evade its legal responsibility towards those from whom private property has been expropriated, answering in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":265647,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/20\/land-owners-acquisition-compensation-supreme-court-legal-news-updates-research-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":252214,"position":5},"title":"Land owners cannot claim acquisition proceeding is lapsed u\/s. 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation Act where stay was obtained by them vide interim orders: Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"April 20, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench comprising of M. R. Shah* and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., reversed the impugned judgment of Karnataka High Court holding that land owners who approach the acquisition proceedings and obtain interim orders in their favour cannot take benefit under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/252214","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=252214"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/252214\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/251197"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=252214"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=252214"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=252214"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}