AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Supreme Court Judgments


Latest Supreme Court of India Judgments 2018

Subscribe

RSS Feed img






Jage Ram & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors [1995] INSC 647 (9 November 1995)

Ramaswamy, K. Ramaswamy, K. Ahmad Saghir S. (J)

CITATION: 1995 SCC Supl. (4) 615 JT 1995 (9) 126 1995 SCALE (6)431

ACT:

HEAD NOTE:

WITH WRIT PETITION [C] NO.851 OF 1988

Jodha Ram & Ors. V. Union of India & Ors.

O R D E R

The only question raised in these two writ petitions is whether an observation is to be made by this Court to the effect that the petitioners would be entitled to allotment of alternative sites by the Delhi Development Authority. It is true that the lands of the petitioners were acquired for a defence purpose, viz., establishment of Radar. They were duly paid the compensation demanded of. One of the reliefs sought in the writ petitions is that since they have been displaced from their holdings, they need some site for construction of their house and that, therefore, the Government of India may make an effort to provide them alternative sites. We are aware of the decision rendered by this Court in State of U.P. vs. Pista Devi [(1986) 4 SCC 251 at 260]. But it depends upon the acquisition for which it was made. In that case, acquisition for which it was made.

In that case, acquisition related to planned development of housing scheme by Meerut Development Authority. Therefore, though no scheme was made providing alternative sites to those displaced pesons whose lands were acquired and who themselves needed housing accommodations, a direction was given to the Meerut Development Authority to provide alternative sits for their housing purpose. Since the acquisition is only for defence purpose and if the request is acceded to, it would create innumerable complications, we are constrained not to accede to forceful pursuasive argument addressed by Mr. R.P. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners.

The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed. No costs.

 Back


 



Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered by nubia  |  driven by neosys