In Brief
Land owners sought to withdraw writ petitions challenging land acquisition and alternatively requested liberty to approach the State Government for denotification under Section 101A of the 2013 Act. The High Court refused this liberty, relying on a Constitution Bench judgment. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's conclusion was not an accurate statement of law. Land owners may represent to the State for denotification if land becomes unviable or non-essential for its intended public purpose. The State has a corresponding duty to evaluate such representations on merit. Mere construction of structures by owners cannot justify denotification; the State must be fully satisfied the land is unviable or non-essential. The appeals were partly allowed, permitting land owners to approach the State under Section 101A.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.