Justice Mishra won't recuse from land case
The question finalised by the court are based on the questions suggested by the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and senior counsel Shyam Divan.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that Justice Arun Mishra would not recuse from hearing a matter relating to the correctness of the two conflicting judgments on the payment of compensation to the landowners whose lands were acquired prior to 2013 under the old land acquisition law and were yet to be paid compensation.
“I am not recusing”, said Justice Mishra heading a five-judge constitution bench also comprising Justice Indira Banerjee, Justice Vineet Saran, Justice M. R. Shah and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat.
Justice Shah said, “We have given a concurring judgment …”
While five-judge constitution bench rejected the plea by certain landowners seeking the recusal of Justice Mishra, the court today framed question relatiung tio the interp[retation of Section 24(2) of the 2013 law — The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act.
The question framed on Wednesday by the five-judge constitution bench would be addressed by both the sides in the course of the herring that would commence from November 6, 2019. The question finalised by the court are based on the questions suggested by the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and senior counsel Shyam Divan.
The Section 24(2) of the 2013 land acquisition law, the interpretation of which is under consideration of the constitution bench, says that if an award for acquiring land under 1894 land acquisition law has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of 2013 law but physical possession of the acquired land has not been taken or compensation for the same has not been paid then same would stand lapsed. And if government still wants to acquire that land then fresh proceedings under the2013 land law had to be initiated.