Today, On 19th May, Supreme Court refuses to entertain Article 32 plea in Ayodhya land acquisition case against UP Housing Board. Tells petitioners to approach High Court: “If every state comes to SC, what will happen?”
New Delhi: The Supreme Court bench led by Justice Suryakant heard a petition under Article 32 concerning the land acquisition process in Ayodhya.
The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate Gopal Shankar Narayanan.
During the hearing, several key concerns were raised about the way the Uttar Pradesh Housing Board is acquiring land in Ayodhya and the laws being applied for such acquisition.
At the beginning of the hearing, Gopal Shankar Narayanan said,
“We are here in article 32 petition.”
However, Justice Suryakant immediately suggested,
“Go to high court.”
The petitioner’s lawyer then strongly opposed the state’s method of acquisition.
He argued that,
“Mylord the UP Housing board is completely abandoning the Land acquisition act 2013.”
He further alleged that the state authority was buying land from farmers at a very low price and selling it at huge rates.
He said,
“Mylord UP housing board is taking the land from farmers at 4000/Sqm and selling it at 80000/sqm. Thye believe the Up land acquistion act 1965 will prevail over a parliament legislation.”
Justice Suryakant again told the counsel,
“Mr Gopal shankar this matter can be handled by the allahabad high court. If for such matter you start coming to high court.”
In response, the senior lawyer tried to highlight the seriousness of the issue by saying,
“This is a massive issue milord.”
Still not convinced, Justice Suryakant remarked,
“Understand if every state starts coming like this to SC what will happen ?”
To this, the petitioner’s lawyer gave a practical reason for coming to the Supreme Court and said,
“Mylord every state HC is taking a different view.”
Justice Suryakant then explained that the High Court’s view is not the final one if the Supreme Court has already given a clear ruling.
He said,
“HC view is irrelevant once we have passed the order. We will make some observation.”
He then made an interim observation and said, “UP Housing board is acquiring 407 acre of land in ayodhya for a project.”
The petitioners have challenged this acquisition on the ground that the state is applying an old law, the Uttar Pradesh Housing and Development Board Act of 1965, for land acquisition.
Also Read: Encroachment on Defense Land in Ayodhya | Allahabad HC to Review Claims
This, they argue, is invalid after the Parliament passed the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Justice Suryakant then observed,
“This is being challenged on the ground that acquisition is made under UP housing law of 1965. But this is repealed by land acquisition act of 2013.”
He also pointed out that the Supreme Court had earlier clarified this issue in a 2024 judgment. He said,
“Mr. Gopal Narayana seems to be right in relying upon decision of SC in 2024 wherein it has been mentioned that after repeal of UP land acquisition act of 1894 the new acquiaition has to happen by act of 2013.”
He further agreed with the principle and made it clear that the correct law for land acquisition now is the 2013 Act.
He said,
“Hence acquisition has to happen as per Land acqusition act 2013. Several such petitiions are coming before this court.”
Finally, while refusing to admit the present petition, the bench guided the petitioners to approach the High Court.
Justice Suryakant concluded,
“Hence not entertaining this petition. Petitioners should approach the HC. Also directing the HC to look into this matter expeditiously as aligned with earlier order of this SC.”
Thus, the Supreme Court underlined that although there is merit in the arguments made by the petitioners, the proper forum to address such grievances is the High Court, and it must now hear the matter quickly, keeping in mind the previous orders of the apex court.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES