Saturday, April 19, 2025
spot_imgspot_img

Top 5 This Week

spot_img

Related Posts

Supreme Court Slams High Court for Denying Fair Hearing, Quashes Land Acquisition Order

The Supreme Court has overturned a High Court ruling that dismissed a land acquisition challenge without giving the petitioner a chance to respond, calling it a violation of natural justice. The case revolved around the Bangalore Development Authority’s (BDA) acquisition process, where the High Court relied solely on the authority’s affidavit to close the matter.

A bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran took issue with the High Court’s swift decision, emphasizing that the petitioner was denied the fundamental right to counter the claims made in the affidavit.

“The Division Bench relied on the authority’s affidavit and closed the matter the same day, without granting the appellant an opportunity to respond. This is a clear breach of natural justice,” the Court stated.

The dispute began when a preliminary land acquisition notification was issued, later revised to exclude certain areas. The appellant’s father challenged this in the High Court, leading to a ruling that allowed affected landowners to present their cases to the BDA. The appellant argued that since adjoining plots had been exempted, his land should be treated similarly. However, the BDA dismissed the plea, prompting a fresh petition before the High Court.

Initially, a single-judge bench ruled in favor of the appellant, but this decision was overturned by the Division Bench, which based its ruling on an affidavit from the BDA. The Supreme Court found this problematic, noting that the affidavit was filed on September 12, 2019, and the matter was closed for hearing on the same day—without allowing the appellant to respond. The verdict itself was delivered later, on September 27, 2019.

“The well-reasoned decision of the single judge was set aside without even giving the appellant a chance to contest the contents of the affidavit,” the Court observed.

On this basis, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order and remanded the matter for reconsideration. It also clarified that the High Court could, if necessary, order a fresh site inspection as part of the proceedings.

Download Judgement

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Popular Articles