In Brief
The petitioner challenged respondent authorities' alleged violation of Supreme Court directions in land acquisition proceedings spanning decades. The land (29.38 acres) was notified for acquisition in 1981, declared forest in 1990, and repeatedly re-notified due to procedural lapses. The Court held that the State complied with directions by issuing a fresh notification in 2020 and passing an award in 2020 under the Fair Compensation Act, 2013 without invoking urgency. Though the petitioner disagreed with land categorization and compensation, the Court found no wilful violation attracting contempt. The petitioner was directed to pursue statutory remedies (reference to competent authority or High Court appeal) rather than contempt proceedings.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.