Supreme Court of India Judgements

47195 Judgements hosted as on 25/04/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition

Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 HELD Respondent No. 2 validly exercised its powers under the MMC Act to direct the acquisition of the Appellants’ land. The argument by the Appellants that the MRTP Act maintains supremacy over the MMC Act is not the correct position of law, in our opinion, and the two statutes exist side-by-side with some degree of overlap. The powers under the MMC Act remain intact even in cases where they cover a subject that is also provided for in the MRTP Act.

Sep 4, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH DR. ABRAHAM PATANI OF MUMBAI AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and…

Land Acquisition

Compensation – Lapse of acquisition proceedings – There is no lapse of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, the land which has stood vested with continues to do – Also, there is no question of payment of any compensation in respect of the suit land as per the Act, 2013 –

Aug 30, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SUBHASH CHANDER SEHGAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M. R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna,…

Land Acquisition

It appropriate and proper to remand the matter to the High Court to consider the writ petition afresh and after giving an opportunity to Nagar Panchayat herein to file additional counter affidavit along with supporting documents and thereafter to give the opportunity to the original writ petitioners to rebut the same.

Aug 14, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH SHIRDI NAGAR PANCHAYAT, SHIRDI — Appellant Vs. APPASAHEB NARAYAN CHAUDHARI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. )…

Land Acquisition

State of Haryana withdrew from acquisition declared as mala fide and inoperative HELD the land transfers are invalidated all transfers effected from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4, to the date of publication of the State’s decision to revoke the acquisition i.e., from 27.08.2004 to 29.01.2010 .

Jul 22, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RAMESHWAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Pamidighantam…

Land Acquisition

Section 24(2) providing for a deemed lapse of proceedings are applicable in case authorities have failed due to their inaction to take possession and pay compensation for five years or more before the 2013 Act came into force – HELD The period of subsistence of interim orders passed by court has to be excluded

Jul 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AGRA — Appellant Vs. ANEK SINGH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil…

Land Acquisition

Provisions of Section 24(2) providing for a deemed lapse of proceedings are applicable in case authorities have failed due to their inaction to take possession and pay compensation for five years or more before the 2013 Act came into force – HELD The period of subsistence of interim orders passed by court has to be excluded

Jul 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. RAM NEWAJ AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…

Land Acquisition

While maintaining the acquisition proceedings, the High Court granted a substantial relief to the land owners by directing payment of compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 which is higher than the compensation payable under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – This approach cannot be faulted.

May 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. RAVINDRA KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. )…

Land Acquisition

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 24 – Additional amount of penal interest must be paid in place of shifting the date for determination of the amount of compensation or to determine the compensation as per 2013 Act.

May 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH REDDY VEERANA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vineet Saran and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil…

You missed

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition and Development — Public Purpose De-reservation — Subject land originally earmarked for High School was de-reserved by competent authority due to insufficient area; subsequent sale to private individuals was upheld by civil courts and its finality was not challenged.

Apr 25, 2026 sclaw
Contempt

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Sections 2(c), 19 — Criminal Contempt — Scandalising the court — An advocate’s public allegations against a sitting judge, made via a press conference and repeated in court applications, can constitute criminal contempt by scandalising the court, lowering its authority, and interfering with judicial proceedings — Such conduct is unbecoming of a legal professional and undermines public confidence in the judiciary.

Apr 25, 2026 sclaw
Service

Recruitment Rules and Advertisement — Essential Qualifications — Work Experience — In absence of a specific rule or advertisement provision, a recruiting agency cannot relax essential eligibility criteria by treating a higher qualification as a replacement for a mandatory essential qualification — A preference for a higher qualification operates only for eligible and meritorious candidates and does not override or supplant the primary requirement of essential eligibility.

Apr 25, 2026 sclaw
Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 10 — Relief of back wages and regularisation — Employee illegally terminated, ordered reinstatement with back wages by Labour Commissioner and Industrial Court — Employer challenged, but interim order for back wages deposit was made and employee reinstated as daily wager — Employee sought regularisation after completing 180 days of service, granted by Industrial Court from the date of 180 days completion as per settlement clause — Employer failed to comply timely, only regularising employee on a sanctioned post after many years, imposing new conditions contrary to prior orders — Supreme Court held that employer cannot impose new conditions limiting regularisation contrary to earlier unchallenged orders and settlement terms, and reversed High Court’s decision setting aside back wages order.

Apr 25, 2026 sclaw