Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Narendra Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Narendra Singh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jun 29, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1051845

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Narendra Singh

Advocate Shri. B.K.Singh

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

w.p.no.8795/2012 (narendra singh versus state of m.p.& ors.) 27.06.2012 shri b.k.singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. shri r.p.tiwari, learned govt. advocate for the respondent/state on advance copy. heard on the question of admission and interim relief. the petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the respondent authorities, inspite of sanction for proceeding with the construction of a canal in accordance with the map (annexure p-3) and after acquiring the land and paying compensation in that respect are now, under pressure from certain persons, are diverting the canal which would not pass through the petitioner's land, without any sanction, notification or any acquisition proceedings and without paying compensation. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed a representation before the collector, satna bringing to his notice his grievances but no decision thereon has been taken. the learned govt. advocate submits that representation shall be dealt with in accordance with law. in view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the w.p.no.8795/2012 (narendra singh versus state of m.p.& ors.) respondent collector, satna to consider the representation of the petitioner and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law as far as possible within a period of two months from the date of furnishing a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition on the said authority by the petitioner. it is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authority would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation by passing a reasoned order. with the aforesaid direction, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of. c.c.as per rules. (r.s.jha) judge gn

Full Judgment

W.P.No.8795/2012 (Narendra Singh versus State of M.P.& ors.) 27.06.2012 Shri B.K.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri R.P.Tiwari, learned Govt.

Advocate for the respondent/State on advance copy.

Heard on the question of admission and interim relief.

The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the respondent authorities, inspite of sanction for proceeding with the construction of a canal in accordance with the map (Annexure P-3) and after acquiring the land and paying compensation in that respect are now, under pressure from certain persons, are diverting the canal which would not pass through the petitioner's land, without any sanction, notification or any acquisition proceedings and without paying compensation.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed a representation before the Collector, Satna bringing to his notice his grievances but no decision thereon has been taken.

The learned Govt.

Advocate submits that representation shall be dealt with in accordance with law.

In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the W.P.No.8795/2012 (Narendra Singh versus State of M.P.& ors.) respondent Collector, Satna to consider the representation of the petitioner and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law as far as possible within a period of two months from the date of furnishing a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition on the said authority by the petitioner.

It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authority would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation by passing a reasoned order.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.

C.C.as per rules.

(R.S.Jha) Judge gn

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial