Mobile View
Main Search Forums Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 4 docs
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Section 11 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
State Of U.P. Etc vs Smt. Pista Devi & Ors on 12 September, 1986
Section 4 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Citedby 25 docs - [View All]
Smt.Sarla Devi Singla vs The Union Territory Of Chandigarh on 21 March, 2009
Parasu Ram vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 21 April, 2004
Mrs.Usha Kumar vs The Union Territory Of Chandigarh on 21 March, 2009
Smt. Janki Bai vs State Of M.P. And Ors. on 30 November, 2004
Subodhchandra Gulabbhai Desai vs State Of Gujarat on 8 March, 2001

User Queries
Supreme Court of India
Savitri Devi vs State Of Haryana And Ors. on 12 February, 1996
Equivalent citations: 1996 IIAD SC 309, JT 1996 (5) SC 665, 1996 (4) KarLJ 735
Bench: K Ramaswamy, G Pattanaik


1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal by special leave arises from the order made by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana on May 31, 1994 in WP No. 1597/91. The contention of the appellant is that since her land was acquired for the public purpose, namely, residential and commercial purpose, the land not having been utilised for the said purpose, she is entitled to the allotment of the land as per the policy of the Government in Annexure 3 appended to the SLP paper book. Admittedly, the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on August 20, 1980 acquiring a large extent of land. The Award came to be made under Section 11 on February 12, 1986 and the compensation was paid. It has become final. The appellant filed the writ petition for direction for allotment of the land to her, a plot in lieu of the acquisition of her land under the policy framed by the Government for allotting the plots to the ouster and as per the guidelines laid down by this Court in State of U.P. v. Pista Devi .

3. Once the land is acquired and the acquisition has become final, the pre-existing right, title and interest held by the erstwhile owner ceases to exist and is divested and stands vested in the State and the beneficiary free from all encumbrances. The question is: whether the erstwhile holder is entitled to the allotment of the sites? The last paragraph of the policy connotes that:

An ouster could be offered a plot when he files affidavit, to the effect that he does not hold any house/shop/plot in that town. Moreover, he should bean owner of land proposed to be acquired for one year before the issue of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and 75% of his land must come under acquisition.

4. On fulfilment of these conditions and then subject to the guidelines laid down therein, the candidate would be entitled to be considered for allotment. Merely because the land is not utilised after the acquisition, they are not automatically entitled to the allotment but subject to the guidelines, their claim 5 would be considered. The appellant is entitled to file an application before the competent authority which would consider and dispose it of according to rules.

5. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.