NDLI: Hamid Ali Khan (d) Through Lrs. & Anr. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	1894 Land Acquisition Act
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (30 of 2013) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ss. 5A and 17(4) – Special powers in case of urgency – Invocation of – Dispensing with hearing of objections u/s. 5A – Justification of – On facts, issuance of Notifications to acquire land for construction of a residential colony – Invocation of power u/s. 4 and 17(4) in regard to the property of the appellant-land owners – Writ petition by the appellants challenging the notifications – Dismissed by the Division Bench – On appeal, held: There was no urgency at all associated with the need to acquire the land immediately which constitutes the foundation for invoking the urgency clause – Notification u/s. 17(4) issued after more than two years of the proposal sent – Declaration u/s. 6 issued almost one year after the issuance of notification u/s. 4 – Having regard to the nature of the scheme, the delay with which s. 6 declaration was issued, possession taken and the nature of the material on the basis of which the proposal was processed, the appellants justified in contending that the notification u/s. 17(4) dispensing with the inquiry u/s. 5A was not justified – Meanwhile, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 has taken the place of 1894 Act – Thus, no question of the matter being considered for an inquiry being held u/s. 5A – Order passed by the Division Bench set aside – Impugned notifications and proceedings based on the same are quashed and property to be returned to the appellant. s. 5A – Hearing of objections under, of the person interested in the property – Held: s.5A guarantees a right to the person interested in the property which was the only statutory safeguard to prevent a compulsory acquisition of his property – Invaluable right given to a person to ventilate his grievances against the acquisition is not to be unjustifiably extinguished – Authority must apply his mind to the relevant material before it and its action must not be malafide – Merely because the purpose of the acquisition is found to be a public purpose, the duty of the authority does not end – Authorities must remain alive and alert to the precious right created in favour of the citizens which is not meant to be a mere empty ritual – Furthermore, the power u/s 17 (4) being discretionary, must be exercised with due care – If there is relevant material however meagre it may be and the authority has without being guided by extraneous considerations applied his mind and taken a decision, then the court would adopt a hands-off approach. s. 17(4) – Special powers in case of urgency – Invocation of – Held: When a challenge is made to the invocation of power u/s.17(4) the writ applicant cannot succeed on bare and bald assertions – Fact specifically within the exclusive knowledge of the State must be laid before the court on the basis of the principle in s. 106 of the Evidence Act – Existence of the exceptional circumstances justifying invoking of s.17(4) must be established in the wake of a challenge – On an appreciation of the evidence made available by all the parties it is open to the court to conclude that no occasion arose for resorting to the power u/s.17 (4) which indeed must be read as an exception to the general rule that the acquisition of property is made after affording an opportunity the person adversely affected to demonstrate that the acquisition was unjustified.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph
Neutral Citation	2021 INSC 774
Petitioner	Hamid Ali Khan (d) Through Lrs. & Anr.
Respondent	State Of U.p. & Ors.
SCR	[2021] 11 S.C.R. 198
Judgement Date	2021-11-23
Case Number	1267

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Hamid Ali Khan (d) Through Lrs. & Anr. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Sri Radhy Shyam (d) Through Lrs. & Ors. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Nand Ram (d) Through Lrs. & Ors. Vs. Jagdish Prasad (d) Through Lrs.

Mahadeo (d) Through Lrs & Ors. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Atma Singh (died) Through Lrs. & Ors. Vs. State of Haryana & Anr

Maya Devi (d) Through Lrs & Ors. Vs. State of Haryana & Anr.

Chandrashekar (d) By Lrs. & Ors. Vs. Land Acquisition Officer & Anr.

K.s. Rajan (d) Through Lrs Vs. The State of Kerala & Anr

State of Haryana & Anr. Vs. Kartar Singh (d) Through Lrs.

Narindrajit Singh & Anr. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Hamid Ali Khan (d) Through Lrs. & Anr. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Hamid Ali Khan (d) Through Lrs. & Anr. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Sri Radhy Shyam (d) Through Lrs. & Ors. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Nand Ram (d) Through Lrs. & Ors. Vs. Jagdish Prasad (d) Through Lrs.

Mahadeo (d) Through Lrs & Ors. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Atma Singh (died) Through Lrs. & Ors. Vs. State of Haryana & Anr

Maya Devi (d) Through Lrs & Ors. Vs. State of Haryana & Anr.

Chandrashekar (d) By Lrs. & Ors. Vs. Land Acquisition Officer & Anr.

K.s. Rajan (d) Through Lrs Vs. The State of Kerala & Anr

State of Haryana & Anr. Vs. Kartar Singh (d) Through Lrs.

Narindrajit Singh & Anr. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Hamid Ali Khan (d) Through Lrs. & Anr. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.