K.D. Yadav Vs. Itat

.....the provisions of land acquisition act, 1894. it would, however, be open to the court in exercise of that power to invite the attention of the executive to any public purpose and the need for land for meeting that public purpose and to require the executive to take a decision, even a reasoned decision, with regard to the same in accordance with the statutory provisions, perhaps even within a reasonable time frame. however, the power of the court under article 226 must necessarily stop at that. thereafter, if the decision taken by the executive is capable of challenge and, there exist appropriate legal grounds for such challenge, it may also be open to the court to quash the decision and to require reconsideration. but no direction in the nature of mandamus whether interim or final can be issued by the court under article 226 to the executive to necessarily acquire a particular area of a particular piece of land for a particular public purpose. section 4; compulsory acquisition of land powers of state government held, renewal of lease in favour of petitioners would not take away power of state government of compulsory acquisition of land. renewal of lease would at best be taken into consideration for determining quantum of compensation. orderthis appeal has been filed against the order dated 30-3-2000 whereby the income tax appellate tribunal b bench, allahabad has rejected the application of the appellant for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. the appellant has preferred an appeal against the order of the tribunal dated 19-3-1990 for the assessment year 1986-87 and against the order dated 10-5-1991 for the assessment year 1987-88. the appeal for the assessment year 1986-87 was barred by 488 days while the appeal for the assessment year 1987-88 was barred by 99 days. the appellant had preferred an appeal before the income tax appellate tribunal 'b' bench, allahabad against the order refusing to condone the delay in filing income tax appeal nos. 2320 and 2321 of 1991. this court allowed the appeal by order dated 5-3-2002 holding that the tribunal was not justified in rejecting the application for condoning the delay. now the present appeal has been filed against the assessment year 1986-87 against the same order. as this court has allowed the appeal against the same order, we allow this appeal also.2. accordingly the order dated 30-3-2000 passed by the income tax appellate tribunal 'b' bench, allahabad is set aside. the tribunal is directed to decide the appeal expeditiously in accordance with law.