REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Ram Bhul Appellant

V/S

STATE OF U.P. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

MARTIN BUM LIMITED VS. CORPORATION OF CALCUTTA [REFERRED TO]
BABUA RAM GOA DAMAN AND DIU INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION UNION OF INDIA VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH :APPA SHANKAR RAO NAIKS:CHANDGI [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. KARNAIL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. BANT RAM [REFERRED TO]
JOSE ANTONIO CRUZ DOS R RODRIGUESE COMMUNIDADE OF CAVELOSSIM VS. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR:LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR [REFERRED TO]
BHAGTI VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MANGATU RAM [REFERRED TO]
TOTA RAM VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. MARRI VENKAIAH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. CHITRASEN BHOI [REFERRED TO]
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD VS. SURENDRA NATH LOOMBA [REFERRED TO]
POPAT BAHIRU GOVARDHANE VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
DHEER SINGH AND 3 OTHERS VS. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
SMT. KAMLA TOMAR VS. STATE OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) Since both the aforesaid writ petitions involve common questions of fact and law, therefore, the same are being decided by a common judgment. For the sake of convenience, Writ-C No.11036 of 2024 (Ram Bhul Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) is being treated as the leading case.

(3.) These two writ petitions have been filed assailing the identical orders dtd. 18/8/2002 whereby the Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition) Joint Organisation, Ghaziabad has rejected the applications filed by the petitioners under Sec. 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as barred by limitation and also for not being accompanied by certified copy of the order passed in reference proceedings under Sec. 18 of the Act.

Click here to view full judgment.

RAM BHUL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address