KESHAV PRASHAD Vs. COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question which arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the constructions raised by the petitioner could have been demolished for the purpose of widening of the road without the consent of the appellant.

(2.) Before the learned Single Judge the respondent herein had relied upon a letter dated 10-8-2000 wherein some authority purported to act on behalf of the Commissioner alleging:

(3.) The writ petitioner-appellant had a right to hold property. Having regard to the provisions of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, such a constitutional right could not have been taken away except in accordance with law i.e., by taking recourse to the statutory provisions of acquisition by the State by invoking the Doctrine of Eminent Domain or by purchasing the land upon holding the negotiations thereof. For the reasons aforementioned we set aside the order under appeal and direct that the appellant shall not be deprived from the land in question, save and except in accordance with law including by acquiring the property in terms of the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('the Act' for brevity).