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
6 paragraphs · 171 wordsSanjay K. Agrawal, J
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that by the impugned notice dated 19.05.2018, the petitioner's land has been acquired by SECL in lieu of which neither compensation has been paid to the petitioner nor rehabilitation has been provided to him and, therefore, the impugned notice is unsustainable and bad in law.
Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that against the impugned notice, petitioner may file reply before the SECL along with documents that will be considered and decided by SECL in accordance with law.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to file reply to the notice dated 19.05.2018 within ten days from today that will be considered and decided by SECL strictly in accordance with law within a period of six weeks. The SECL will be at liberty to proceed thereafter.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).