Madras High Court Upholds Appointment of District Judges as Tamil Nadu Lokayukta Secretary  ||  Allahabad High Court: IO’s Mere Apprehension Cannot Justify Withholding Seized Items  ||  Patna High Court: Mere Sight of Spouse in Compromising Position doesn't Prove Adultery  ||  Sikkim High Court: POCSO Case not Quashed on Settlement after Survivor Turns Major  ||  Chhattisgarh High Court: Backward Classes Commission Cannot Decide Private Commercial Disputes  ||  SC: Futures & Options Investors Cannot Recover Trading Losses From Professional Clearing Members  ||  Supreme Court: NCTE Executive Committee Can Seek Annual Reports From Teacher Education Institutes  ||  SC: S.362 CrPC Cannot Limit HC’s Inherent Power to Recall Judgment Causing Miscarriage of Justice  ||  Supreme Court Upholds RBI’s Power to Supersede Multi-State Co-op Bank Boards Beyond Six Months  ||  Supreme Court: Retaining Victim in a Specific Role Cannot Reduce Functional Disability    

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