Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.76 seconds)

Jaipur Development Authority vs Radhey Shyam on 17 February, 1994

By the award, visibly, the appellant's/writ petitioner's predecessor-in-interest had been granted monetary compensation. He was, at the relevant time, in occupation of a government land. Even assuming that the recommendation to allot, along with six other awardees, a plot of land in the scheme area or otherwise, had been advisory in nature and not in lieu of compensation, the same, by no means, would vest an inviolable right in the appellant/writ petitioner to constitute an actionable claim justiciable in law. The distinction sought to be highlighted on his behalf thus, cannot be sustained. The fundamental legal principle, as enounced in Jaipur Development Authority Vs. Radhey Shyam (supra) and reiterated in the subsequent decisions, in our considered view, does not get diluted, even if the recommendation in the award for allotment of a plot of land to the appellant's/writ petitioner's predecessor-in-interest, is in addition to the compensation otherwise granted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 61 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

Secretary, Jaipur Development ... vs Daulat Mal Jain on 20 September, 1996

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.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 344 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

Narpat Singh Etc.Etc vs Jaipur Development Authority & Anr on 24 April, 2002

As their Lordships of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jaipur Development Authority Vs. Radhey Shyam (supra), Jaipur Development Authority Vs. Daulat Mal Jain (supra) and Narpat Singh Vs. Jaipur Development Authority (supra) have, in unequivocal terms, adjudged such allotment of land to be lacking in jurisdiction, the instant appeal is bereft of any merit, and is liable to be dismissed, he insisted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 36 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Jaipur Development Authority & Ors vs Vijay Kumar Data & Anr on 12 July, 2011

The claimants in Jaipur Development Authority & Ors. Vs. Vijay Kumar Data & Anr.(supra), included the khatedars of the land involved, their transferees, nominees/sub-nominees. The Land Acquisition Officer, by the award passed, not only determined the amount of compensation payable to the land owners and beneficiaries of illegal transfers, but also directed allotment of plots to the owners, their transferees and nominees/sub-nominees out of the acquired land.
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 70 - G S Singhvi - Full Document

Jaipur Development Authority vs Mahesh Sharma & Anr on 21 September, 2010

In Jaipur Development Authority Vs. Mahesh Sharma & Anr.(supra), which too involved acquisition of 552 bighas and 8 biswas of land in Village Bhojpura and Chak Sudershanpura, Tehsil Jaipur for Lal Kothi Scheme, by the award dated 29.4.1971, the concerned Land Acquisition Officer determined a sum of Rs.2,62,680/- as compensation. He did also recommend allotment of additional land measuring 2500 square yards of developed land to be given to the respondent therein. It was noticed that the land acquired was a government land, after the investiture thereof in the government under the provisions of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952.
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 18 - M Sharma - Full Document
1