Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
PETITIONER:
NATWARBHAI MAGAINBHAI PATEL
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
COLLECTOR & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10/05/1996
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, FAIZAN UDDIN, G.B. PATTANAIK
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
Counsel for the petitioner admits that a notification
under Section 10 [5] of the Urban Ceiling Act was published
pursuant to which the excess vacant land was surrendered and
taken possession of by the Government. Consequently, the
land stands vested in the State free rom all the
encumbrances. In what manner the lands require to be
utilised has been regulated under the provisions of the act.
It is not a condition, under the Act, that payment of
compensation be made before utilisation of the land of which
the petitioner was erswhile owner. Under these
circumstances, we do not find any illegality in the order
passed by the High Court in Special Civil Appeal No.4093/93
on May 15, 1995.
The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed.