Supreme Court: Confession Without Corroboration Cannot Form the Basis of Conviction  ||  SC: Higher Land Acquisition Compensation to Some Owners Cannot Invalidate Awards to Others  ||  SC: Prior Written Demand is Not Mandatory For an Industrial Dispute to Exist or be Referred  ||  SC: Complaint U/S 175(4) BNSS Against a Public Servant Must Meet the Conditions of Section 175(3)  ||  P&H HC: Customary Restrictions Can't Stop Widow From Alienating Non-Ancestral Property  ||  Delhi High Court: SC's 'Mihir Rajesh Shah' Directive on Written Arrest Grounds Applies Prospectively  ||  MP HC: MPPSC Cannot Reject Doctors For PG Additional Registration Not Mentioned in the Advertisement  ||  Supreme Court: Registered Sale Deed Carries Strong Presumption of Genuineness  ||  SC: Registry Cannot Intrude Into Judiciary’s Exclusive Domain By Questioning Why a Party is Impleaded  ||  Calcutta HC: Third-Party Suits in a Deity’s Name are Allowed Only When The Sebait Loses Authority    

Uddar Gagan Properties Ltd. v. Sant Singh and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (13 May 2016)

“Profiteering” found in HUDA-private developer transaction

MANU/SC/0590/2016

Land Acquisition

An authority acquiring land under the guise of public purpose, but subsequently passing it on to a private builder amounts to acquisition for a private purpose, the Supreme Court held.

The court quashed Haryana Urban Development Authority’s transfer of publicly acquired land to a private builder. Terming the transaction “fraudulent” and “clandestine”, the court the found the same to be “profiteering at the cost of livelihood and existence of a farmer”.

While the judges concurred with the High Court’s earlier ruling which found abuse of power in the matter, they opined instead that the entirety of the acquisition need not be quashed. Transfer of land by HUDA in favour of the builder was cancelled. Sale compensation paid by the builder to land owners will serve as compensation, who will also not be required to refund any amount.

The land in questions was acquired for commercial and residential development as Sectors 27-28 in Rohtak, Haryana. Over 400 acres of farmland was acquired by HUDA and subsequently transferred to Uddar Gagan Properties, the builder-developer.

Relevant : State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh MANU/SC/0019/1952 Bangalore City Cooperative v. The State of Karnataka MANU/SC/0091/2012 Mahavir and Anr. v. Rural Institute, Amravati and Anr. MANU/SC/0763/1995

Tags : LAND ACQUISITION   FRAUD   HUDA   PRIVATE USE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved