(Kurian Joseph and R. Banumathi, JJ.)
Munshiya (Dead) Thr Lrs. ___________________________ Appellant
v.
State of U.P. & Ors. ______________________________ Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal No. 9142 of 2017 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 3502 of 2017], decided on July 17, 2017
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by
Kurian, J.:—
1. Leave granted.
2. We find that the appellants are aggrieved since their cases have been remanded by the High Court to the Reference Court for fresh consideration, taking note of the awards passed by the Coordinate Bench of the Reference Court.
3. Apparently, this confusion has arisen because the Reference in respect of the same Notification are handled by different district courts.
4. We request the High Court, on the Administrative Side, to look into this difficulty and see that the References in respect of the same acquisition are heard by the same Bench.
5. Coming to the facts of this case, it cannot be of serious dispute that the adjacent land owners have been granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 65/- per sq. yard. That grant has become final since the appeals and the Special Leave Petitions have been dismissed.
6. In that view of the matter, we allow this appeal. The appellants shall be entitled to the land value at the rate of Rs. 65/- per sq. yard and shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits.
7. We make it clear that the appellants shall not be entitled to any statutory benefits for the period covered by any delay, either before the High Court or before this Court.
8. I.A. No. 2 – the application for impleadment is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the liberty available to the applicant to take recourse to any other remedy.
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 3502/2017
Munshiya (Dead) thr Lrs ______________________________ Petitioner
v.
State of U.P. & Ors _______________________________ Respondent(s)
(with I.A. No. 2 – application for impleadment)
Date : 17-07-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.
(Before Kurian Joseph and R. Banumathi, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Vinay Garg, Adv.
Mr. Tanmay Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Uday Singh, Adv.
Ms. Deepam Garg, Adv.
Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, AOR
Mr. Ravindra Kumar, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
Order
9. Leave granted.
10. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed non-reportable Judgment.
11. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
———
