Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (3.36 seconds)

Dalsukhbhai Bachubhai Satasia And Ors vs State Of Gujarat And Ors on 6 January, 2026

“4.3. A fair reading of Sections 3 and 4 of the 1999 Repeal Act makes it clear that all proceedings relating to any order made or purported to be made under the principal Act (the 1976 Act) pending immediately before the commencement of the 1999 Repeal Act, before any court, tribunal or other authority shall abate. Section 4 of the Repeal Act shall not apply provided possession of land has been taken over by the State Government or any person duly authorised by the State Government in this behalf or by the competent authority. Therefore, if the possession of the surplus land/land has been taken over by the State Government or any person duly authorised by the State Government in this behalf or by the competent authority, in that case, the proceedings relating to any order made under the principal 1976 Act shall not abate, meaning thereby that the 1999 Repeal Act shall not affect all those proceedings with respect to the land of which the possession has been taken over. Therefore, before declaring the proceedings as having abated in view of Sections 3 and 4 of the 1999 Repeal Act, 45 it has to be considered and decided whether possession of the surplus land/land has been taken over by the State Government or any person duly authorised by the State Government in this behalf or by the competent authority or not. If it is found and held that the possession of the surplus land has been taken over, in that case, the proceedings shall not be declared as having been abated.” (underlining by us)
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1