Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether compensation for land acquired under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 was to be determined under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 or the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Analysis: The notification issued under Section 28(1) made it clear that compensation was to be determined in terms of the Act, 2013. The acquisition proceedings were initiated after the new enactment came into force, and the authorities had themselves proceeded on that basis. In that view, the endorsement proposing determination of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 could not be sustained.
Conclusion: The compensation was required to be determined under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and the contrary endorsement was liable to be quashed.
Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded, and the respondents were directed to proceed with compensation determination under the Act, 2013 for the acquired land.
Ratio Decidendi: Where acquisition proceedings are initiated after the commencement of the Act, 2013 and the governing notification contemplates compensation under that enactment, compensation must be determined under the Act, 2013 and not under the repealed 1894 Act.