Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 543 (0.97 seconds)
Documents citing Secretary, Jaipur Development ... vs Daulat Mal Jain on 20 September, 1996

Chandra Pal Singh vs J D A & Ors on 5 December, 2013

The view propounded in Jaipur Development Authority Vs. Radhey Shyam (supra) qua ouster of the jurisdiction of the Land Acquisition Officer to allot land in lieu of money compensation, was reiterated in Jaipur Development Authority Vs. Daulat Mal Jain, following a detailed reference to Section 31 of the Act and Rules 31 & 36 of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Rules, 1956.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - A Roy - Full Document

Chandra Pal Singh vs J D A & Ors on 30 November, 2010

Although, it may be correct that allotment of land that was proposed to be made to petitioner was not in lieu of acquisition of any land of which he was owner but because of fact that owners of 'kachchi basti' were uprooted from their houses and petitioner was also one of survey holders and in lieu thereof he was proposed to allot land. At same time directions contained in award if construed as observations, same can be lost sight because in award dated 09.01.1964 Land Acquisition Officer categorically held that it will be quite appropriate that before huts are removed an alternative site is provided to these persons. It was therefore determined that as per Annexure I attached owners of huts may be paid compensation noted against their names and should be provided with smaller plots in the rear site, if feasible in this scheme area or in some other suitable scheme area at the scheme rate fixed by the improvement trust. Now in this case what was proposed by Land and Property Committee in its meeting dated 05.02.1987 was that in compliance of award, survey holders could be allotted land measuring 250 square yard per awardee and out of this, they would be charged at rate of Rs.8/- per square yard for plot measuring 110 square yard and for plot for remaining land measuring 140 square yard at rate of Rs.99/- per square yard was proposed to be charged. Learned counsel for petitioner has argued that allotment of plot made to petitioner was not in compliance of award but it was independent decision made by respondents, I am not persuaded to uphold this argument because minutes of meeting as reproduced by petitioner at Page No.9 of writ petition, clearly shows that decision was taken in compliance of award which is what is mentioned therein. Supreme Court in Secretary, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur Vs. Daulat Mal Jain & Others (supra) and Jaipur Development Authority v. Radhey Shyam (supra) has not approved such action of Land Acquisition Officer and held the same to be illegal.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - M Rafiq - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next