IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.33166/2025]
SAVITRI DEVI NAGAR & ORS. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 37658/2025]
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 [Arising out of SLP(C) No. 38027/2025]
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.3523/2026]
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.3277/2026]
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned Senior Counsel on behalf of
the appellants as well as learned Senior Counsel
representing the Ghaziabad Development Authority. The
1
High Court has through the impugned judgment elaborately
discussed the broad principles required to be followed in
the matter of acquisition of land, previously under the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (since repealed) (in short,
the “1894 Act”) as well as implication of the provisions
of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 (in short, the “2013 Act”). In this vein, the High
Court rightly held that it was not a case of such urgency
where Section 17 of the 1894 Act ought to have been
invoked.
3. Having identified such illegality in the
acquisition process and having considered the 2013 Act,
which, meanwhile, came into force, the High Court has
ri...