Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Supreme Court in Kedar Nath Yadav v. State of W.B., (2017) 11 SCC 601, had quashed the acquisition proceedings for Tata Motors’ Nano Car project in Singur, Hooghly and directed restoration of land to the original landowners/cultivators by the State.
2025 SCC Vol. 7 Part 4: Explore the latest Supreme Court Cases on Arbitration, Judiciary, Insolvency and Bankruptcy, Land Acquisition, and Service Law.
“The Rehabilitation and Resettlement Scheme was for the benefit of only those who were permanently residing in the area and who were to be rendered houseless and landless on account of acquisition proceedings for the purpose of construction.”
2025 SCC Vol. 6 Parts 1 and 2: Explore the latest Supreme Court Cases on Minority Institutions, Land Acquisition, and Abuse of Process of Court.
In July 2022 State of West Bengal had expressed its intention to resume the 395 acres of land and called upon the petitioners to furnish project plan for the proposed EV project detailing requirement of the land and justification. By an order dated 9-11-2022, State had resumed 395 acres of land.
2025 SCC Vol. 5 Part 3: Explore the latest Supreme Court Cases on the Arbitration, IBC, CPC, Contract, Criminal Law, Education Law, Labour Law and Land Acquisition.
“A Master Plan is a policy document for guiding the future development of the cities or towns in a planned manner which cannot be modified or revised… at the whims and fancies of the authority concerned… It should be implemented in larger public interest.”
“Legislative intent behind proviso to Section 26(1) is to ensure that the landowners receive fair compensation reflective of the market value prevailing at the time of acquisition”.
“Almighty would undoubtedly shower his kindness and benevolence for the development of a metro rail station, which will benefit lakhs of people from all segments of society, some of whom may well be devotees, who visit the temple.”
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
“Delay, laches, and disputed questions of fact are all matters that cannot be ignored when it comes to exercising discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.”
The Court stated that modifying or clarifying the judgment in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, (2019) 9 SCC 304 would lend itself to violating the doctrine of immutability, undermining the finality of the decision.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 11(6) and 37: Setting aside of order setting aside award, by Court exercising jurisdiction under
Supreme Court directed that a 64.7% enhancement in compensation would apply in rem, ensuring that uniform benefits would be provided to all affected landowners under the present land acquisition process.
Allahabad High Court reiterated that Arbitration Act transcends all territorial barriers.
“Delay by the authorities, at times, may constitute a cause of action in itself. This would be especially true in a case of a live and continuing cause of action or in the event of failure to perform a mandatory statutory duty. It is, however, equally true that there can be cases where delay and laches would be fatal and can result in the dismissal of the writ petition.”
Upholding the order, the Court stated that the Governor in the normal circumstance has to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers as obtaining under Article 163 of the Constitution, but can take independent decision in exceptional circumstances and opined that the instant case was one such exception.
The Court noted that the land’s exclusion was based on expert recommendations and legal restrictions, including Regulation 119, which prohibits acquiring land within 45 meters of a railway or highway.
A quick review of reported cases this week from various High Courts across the country
No justification was offered for inordinate and insensitive delay and not paying any compensation for almost 36 years. Such conduct amounts to virtual expropriation of a citizen’s property without the authority of law and without paying any compensation and violates Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution.