AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
9 paragraphs · 208 wordsPetitions reveal that even though the land stands utilized by the respondents for construction of road, but, however, the land never came to be
acquired by the State in accordance with law. We do not go into the merits of the case and more specifically the issue of limitation, as is so raised
by Mr.J.K. Verma, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the reason that allegedly the land was put to use in the year 2005.
Be that as it may, as mutually prayed for, we dispose of the present petitions with direction to respondent No.1 to consider and decide the
petitioners'' request, which the petitioners shall be making within a period of two weeks from today. We are hopeful that upon receipt of such
representation(s), the respondent authorities shall take action, rather expeditiously and more so within a period of two months thereafter.
Needless to add, all actions shall be taken strictly in accordance with law. Also, opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to all concerned.
Liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach the Court on same and subsequent cause of action, if so required and desired. Also, alternate
remedies, in accordance with law, can be exhausted. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.