https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171092 A ministerial file noting does not by itself amount to a final governmental decision to withdraw from acquisition under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; the decision must be formalised, authenticated and communicated before it operates as an executive act. The Court also held that refusal to de-notify acquired land was not arbitrary or discriminatory under Article 14 where the land had been validly acquired, possession was taken later, and the constructions were unauthorized. Equality cannot compel the State to repeat an illegality or grant relief on non-identical comparators, so the acquisition stood and possession had to be surrendered. en-us Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Nov 2015 07:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171092 A ministerial file noting does not by itself amount to a final governmental decision to withdraw from acquisition under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; the decision must be formalised, authenticated and communicated before it operates as an executive act. The Court also held that refusal to de-notify acquired land was not arbitrary or discriminatory under Article 14 where the land had been validly acquired, possession was taken later, and the constructions were unauthorized. Equality cannot compel the State to repeat an illegality or grant relief on non-identical comparators, so the acquisition stood and possession had to be surrendered. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171092