{"id":206190,"date":"2003-04-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-04-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2"},"modified":"2016-09-30T04:16:41","modified_gmt":"2016-09-29T22:46:41","slug":"prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2","title":{"rendered":"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman … vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman … vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003<\/div>\n
Author: K Balakrishnan<\/div>\n
Bench: K.G. Balakrishnan, P. Venkatarama Reddi.<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  3064 of 2000\n\nPETITIONER:\nPrayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman Sahkari Samiti Ltd.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nAllahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 16\/04\/2003\n\nBENCH:\nK.G. Balakrishnan & P. Venkatarama Reddi.\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, J.\n<\/p>\n
\tAn extent of  2 bigha, 5 biswa and 8 dhur of land falling in Village Civil
\nStation in the\tcity of Allahabad was acquired under the provisions of the Land
\nAcquisition Act, 1894\t(for short, “the Act”),\t   for establishing a commercial
\ndistrict centre\t   at the instance of the Allahabad Development Authority (ADA).
\nNotification under  Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 13.1.1987 and
\nDeclaration under Section 6(1) was made on 6.2.1987.   Emergency provision
\nunder Section 17 of the Act was invoked and the award was published on
\n25.5.1987.\tThe land in question was government land which had been given
\non lease to Shiv  Narain Chaudhary,   Laxman Narain Chaudhary and others.
\nThe period of lease had expired in 1960 and it was not renewed.\t The award was
\npassed\t  on 25.5.1987\t   and\t the   compensation was fixed at Rs.9,80,565.06.
\nAs  both the Government\t  and\tthe   lease holders  claimed the compensation,
\nthe Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO)  referred this dispute to the Civil
\nCourt on 12.10.1987   under Section 30 of the Act.   The Reference was
\nregistered as Reference Case No. 124 of 1987 and the matter was pending
\nbefore the 11th Addl. District Judge, Allahabad.      While the matter was so
\npending,    the Addl. District Judge, Allahabad, sent a communication on
\n11.8.1992 to the SLAO stating that on perusal of the case file,\t  an application
\nfiled  under Section 18 of the Act   by the appellant herein, namely, Prayag
\nUpnivesh Awas Evam Nirman Sahkari Samiti Ltd. (Appellant-Samiti),    was
\nfound to be  on the file and that no mention had been made regarding that
\napplication in the  letter of Reference.   A clarification, therefore,\t was sought by
\nthe Addl. District Judge.   Pursuant to this communication, the SLAO sent the
\nreply stating that such an application was also attached and due to an error,\tthe
\nsame was not mentioned in the letter dated  12.10.1987.\t  After the  receipt of
\nthis letter,\t the 11th Addl. District Judge impleaded the appellant-Samiti  and
\nproceeded in the matter as if there was a proper Reference under Section 18 of
\nthe Act.  It was held by the Addl. District Judge that for the land acquired by the
\nGovernment,    the market value shall be Rs.1,400\/- per square yard.  Seventy
\nfive per cent of the compensation was directed to be paid to the appellant-Samiti
\nand the balance twenty five per cent was directed to be paid to the State
\nGovernment.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe  award   passed by the Addl. District Judge was challenged by the
\nsponsoring  authority, viz.,  Allahabad Development Authority (ADA)  as well as
\nthe State.   ADA urged before the High Court  that there was no proper
\nReference under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of the compensation and
\nthat the Addl. District Judge had no jurisdiction to grant enhancement of
\ncompensation.\tIt was submitted that the appellant-Samiti did not participate in
\nthe acquisition proceedings and therefore, they were not entitled to file Reference
\napplication under Section 18 of the Act.   The High Court accepted the
\ncontentions raised by the ADA and the State and held that there was no proper
\nreference under Section 18 of the Act and enhancement of compensation
\nordered by the reference court was set aside.\t   However, the\t  finding on Issue
\nNo. 2\tthat the Samiti will be entitled to get seventy five per cent of the
\ncompensation amount and the balance twenty five per cent shall be given to the
\nState,\t was affirmed.\t   The judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court is
\nchallenged before us.\n<\/p>\n
\tWe heard the appellant’s counsel   and\tcounsel for the respondents.
\nThe counsel for the appellant-Samiti submitted before us that the SLAO, by his
\nsubsequent letter,    clarified that an error had been committed in not mentioning
\nabout the application submitted by the appellant-Samiti in the Reference letter,
\nalthough such application itself had been sent along with the Reference\t file\tby
\nthe SLAO to the Additional District Judge.  Learned counsel submitted that there
\nwas proper Reference under Section 18 of the Act and, therefore, the award
\npassed by the Civil Court was proper  and valid\t and was not liable to be
\nquashed by the High Court.    Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other
\nhand, submitted\t that there was no  proper  Reference under Section 18 and as
\nthere was no such Reference, the Addl. District Judge lacked jurisdiction and,
\ntherefore, the award passed by the learned Addl. District Judge\t is non est   and
\nhas rightly been set aside by the High Court.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe short question that arises for consideration  is  whether  the SLAO
\nhad made a reference under Section 18 of the Act?   Admittedly, the original
\nreference was only under Section 30 of the Act,\t   for apportionment  as there
\nwas a dispute as to who should get the compensation.\n<\/p>\n
In the Reference letter sent by the SLAO on 12.10.1987, nothing has been
\nstated regarding the claim for enhancement of  compensation   put in by any of
\nthe parties.   It is also pertinent to note that  in the  reference letter,  the
\nappellant-Samiti  is not shown as a party.   The first claimant\t   is one, Shiv
\nNarain Lal Chaudhary and there are six other claimants.\t The Reference letter of
\nthe SLAO clearly shows that the appellant-Samiti was not a party to such
\nReference.   It is surprising as to how the learned Addl. District Judge could seek
\na clarification on the basis of\t an application which was found\t  on the file and if
\nsuch an application was made by any party, naturally there would  have been a
\nReference under Section 18 of the Act and it would have\t been specifically
\nmentioned in the Reference letter.  It is equally surprising that even though the
\nappellant was not a party to the reference case and was allegedly not having
\nknowledge of the proceedings, how and at whose instance the clarification was
\nsought by the Addl. District Judge.  It is also pertinent to note that\tthe
\nclarification issued by the SLAO subsequent to the letter from the Addl. District
\nJudge, cannot be  construed  as Reference under Section 18 of the Act.\t   The
\nletter from SLAO  reads as follows :\n<\/p>\n
“This is with reference to your letter dated 11.8.1992 whereby you
\nhave  enquired as to whether in the reference forwarded on
\n12.10.1987 entitled as State Government vs.  Shiv Narayan
\nChaudhary  and Ors.,   the<\/a> reference of Prayag Upnivesh Sahkari
\nSamiti, under Section 30\/18 was also made?  In this connection it is
\nsubmitted that in the file of the office, the reference of Prayag
\nUpnivesh Sahkari Samiti Ltd., is also attached.\t Probably, due to
\nerror in the previous reference letter dated 12.10.1987 the same
\nwas not mentioned.”\n<\/p>\n
\tThe letter quoted above by itself is not sufficient to make it as a Reference
\npurported to have been made under Section 18 of the Act.   The learned Addl.
\nDistrict Judge clearly erred in assuming that there was a Reference under
\nSection\t 18 of the Act.\t  The subsequent impleadment of the  Samiti as a party to
\nthe Reference, which was pending under Section 30 of the Act, and the
\nconversion of the same also as a Reference  under Section 18,  were illegal and
\nhas rightly been quashed by the High Court.\n<\/p>\n
\tIt is well established\tthat the reference court gets jurisdiction only if the
\nmatter is referred to it under Section 18 or 30\t of the Act   by  the  Land
\nAcquisition  Officer and that  civil court has got  the jurisdiction and authority only
\nto decide the objections referred to it.       The reference  court cannot  widen the
\nscope of its jurisdiction or   decide matters which are not referred to it.   This
\nquestion was considered by various judicial authorities and one of the earliest
\ndecisions reported  on\tthis  point\tis Pramatha Nath Mullick Bahadur vs.
\nSecy of State\t AIR 1930 PC 64.  This\t was a case  where the claimant sought
\na Reference under Section 18 of the  Act.   In the application filed by the
\nclaimant, he  raised objection only regarding the valuation of the land.   The
\nclaimant did not dispute the measurements of the land given in the award.
\nBefore the reference court, the claimant raised objection regarding the
\nmeasurements of the land and sought for\t   fresh measurements.\tThis was
\nrefused and the claimant applied to the High Court for revision of this\t   order, but
\nwithout success.   Again, in  the  appeal, the claimant raised the same objection
\nregarding measurements and the High Court rejected it.\tThe Judicial Committee
\nof the Privy Council held thus :\n<\/p>\n
 “Their Lordships have\tno doubt that the jurisdiction of the Courts
\nunder this  Act is a special one and is strictly limited by the terms of
\nthese sections.\t  It only arises when a specific objection has been
\ntaken to the Collector’s award, and it is confined to a consideration
\nof that objection.   Once therefore it is ascertained that the only
\nobjection taken is to the amount of compensation, that alone is the
\n“matter” referred, and the Court has no power to determine or
\nconsider anything beyond it.”\n<\/p>\n
\tIn another case, namely, Mohammed Hasnuddin vs. State of
\nMaharashtra<\/a> (1979) 2 SCC 572, this Court observed :\n<\/p>\n
\t“Every tribunal of limited jurisdiction is not only entitled but
\nbound to determine whether the matter in which it is asked to
\nexercise its jurisdiction comes within the limits of its  special
\njurisdiction and whether the jurisdiction of such tribunal is
\ndependent on the existence of certain facts or circumstances.  Its
\nobvious duty is to  see that these facts and circumstances exist to
\ninvest it with jurisdiction, and where\ta tribunal derives its
\njurisdiction from the statute that creates it and that statute also
\ndefines the conditions under which the tribunal can function, it goes
\nwithout saying that before that tribunal assumes jurisdiction in a
\nmatter, it must be satisfied that the conditions requisite for its
\nacquiring seisin of that matter have in fact arisen.   As observed by
\nthe Privy Council in Nusserwanjee Pestonjee v. Meer
\nMynoodeen Khan\t wherever jurisdiction is given to a court by an
\nAct of Parliament and such jurisdiction is only given upon certain
\nspecified terms contained  in that Act, it is a\t universal principle that
\nthese terms must be complied with, in order to create and raise the
\njurisdiction for if they be not complied with the jurisdiction does  not
\narise.”\n<\/p>\n
In   K. Kankarathanamma & Ors.\t vs.\tState of Andhra Pradesh &
\nOrs.   (1964) 6 SCR  294,   the Land Acquisition Officer made a reference under
\nSection 30 for the apportionment of the compensation amount amongst the
\nvarious claimants.  Six of the appellants did not accept the award of the Land
\nAcquisition Officer and made application to him for referring the matter for
\ndetermination by the court, but no reference was made by him pursuant to this
\napplication.   When the matter came up before the court, it proceeded on the
\nfooting that the   reference  made to it was not merely limited to the
\napportionment of compensation but also with respect to the amount of
\ncompensation.  No objection, however, was raised by the State before the
\nreference court regarding the absence of reference.   When the matter came up
\nbefore the High Court, the Govt. Pleader raised this objection.\t Though the High
\nCourt allowed the plea to be raised before it,\tbut ultimately it  negatived the plea.
\nThe  appellants contended before the High Court that pursuant to the failure of
\nthe State to raise the plea before the Subordinate Judge as to the absence of a
\nreference, the State must be deemed to\thave waived the point.\t Rejecting this
\ncontention, this Court held :\n<\/p>\n
“..the matter goes to the court only upon a reference made by
\nthe Collector.\tIt is only after such a reference is made that the
\ncourt is empowered to determine the objections made by a claimant
\nto the\taward.\tSection 21 restricts  the scope of the proceedings
\nbefore the court to  consideration of the contentions of the persons
\naffected by the objection.   These  provisions thus leave no doubt
\nthat the jurisdiction of the court arises solely on the basis of a
\nreference made to it.  No doubt, the Land  Acquisition Officer has
\nmade a reference under s. 30 of the Land Acquisition Act but that
\nreference was only in regard to the apportionment of the
\ncompensation amongst the various claimants.   Such a reference
\nwould certainly not invest the court with the jurisdiction to consider
\na matter not  directly connected with it.   This is really not a mere
\ntechnicality for as pointed out by the Privy Council in
\nNusserwanjee Pestonjee & Ors. V. Meer Mynoodeen Khan
\nWullud Meer Sudroodeen Khan Bahadoor  wherever jurisdiction
\nis given by a statute and such jurisdiction is only given upon certain
\nspecified terms contained therein it is a universal principle that
\nthose terms should be complied with, in order to create and raise
\nthe jurisdiction, and if they are not complied with, the jurisdiction
\ndoes not arise.\t  This was, therefore, a case of lack of inherent
\njurisdiction and the failure of the State to object to the proceedings
\nbefore the court on the ground of an absence of reference in so far
\nas the determination  of compensation was concerned cannot
\namount to waiver or acquiescence.  Indeed,  when there is an
\nabsence of inherent jurisdiction, the defect cannot be waived nor
\ncan be cured by acquiescence.”\n<\/p>\n
In a recent decision of this Court in Ajjam Linganna vs. Land
\nAcquisition Officer<\/a>   (2002) 9\tSCC 426,    it was held that the Reference court
\nhas no power to convert the Reference under Section 30\t  into\tone    under
\nSection\t 18 of the Act at the instance of those who did not apply for reference
\nearlier.\n<\/p>\n
In the instant case, there was no Reference by the SLAO under Section
\n18 of the Act and the appellant-Samiti was not before the SLAO.\t  Even the
\napplication allegedly filed on 12.10.1987 has rightly been characterized as
\nsuspicious as no mention has been made by the SLAO in the Reference letter
\ndated 12.10.1987.   In the absence of a proper Reference, the Additional District
\nJudge had no jurisdiction to decide the question of enhancement of
\ncompensation.\tWhen such an objection was not referred to the court, there was
\ncomplete lack of jurisdiction. In our view,   the decision  of the High Court is
\ncorrect and requires no interference.\t The   appeal is without merits and  is
\naccordingly dismissed with costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman … vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003 Author: K Balakrishnan Bench: K.G. Balakrishnan, P. Venkatarama Reddi. CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 3064 of 2000 PETITIONER: Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman Sahkari Samiti Ltd. RESPONDENT: Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16\/04\/2003 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-206190","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nPrayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman ... vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman ... vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2003-04-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-29T22:46:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman … vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-04-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-29T22:46:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2\"},\"wordCount\":2354,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2\",\"name\":\"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman ... vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-04-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-29T22:46:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman … vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman ... vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman ... vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-04-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-29T22:46:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman … vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003","datePublished":"2003-04-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-29T22:46:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2"},"wordCount":2354,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2","name":"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman ... vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-04-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-29T22:46:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prayag-upnivesh-awas-evam-nirman-vs-allahabad-vikas-pradhikaran-anr-on-16-april-2003-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Prayag Upnivesh Awas Evam Nirman … vs Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran & Anr on 16 April, 2003"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/206190","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=206190"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/206190\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=206190"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=206190"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=206190"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}