Judgment Intelligence
Other
Meerut Development Authority v. Parmeshwar Dayal & Anr.
2026 INSC 1106
SLP (Civil) No. 12994 of 2026 with 14 connected SLPs (Diary Nos. 30365, 30167, 30166, 29777, 29870, 30188, 30159, 30366, 30158, 29869, 30165, 30777, 30760 and 30596 of 2026)
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Date of Decision
- 8 October 2026
- Bench
- Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 54
Final Outcome
Special leave petitions disposed of with directions for deposit, partial release and investment; the High Court was requested to decide the first appeals on priority, and the order is to be placed before its Chief Justice (paras 7-13).
Brief Facts
Land for the Shatabdi Nagar Housing Scheme was acquired in 1987; the 1990 award fixed compensation at Rs 20 and Rs 27 per square yard, which the Reference Court at Meerut enhanced on 30.03.2024 to Rs 690 and Rs 720 per square yard (para 3). The Authority's first appeals are pending in the Allahabad High Court, which stayed the award on condition that the Authority deposit 50% of the enhanced amount in cash, which the claimants could withdraw, and secure the rest (para 5). An order of 24.04.2026 in a similar matter had allowed release of only about 8.33% of the enhanced amount (para 6).
Court's Findings
As the petitions arose from appeals pending in the High Court, no useful purpose would be served by keeping them pending; to maintain parity with the order of 24.04.2026, the Court directed the Authority to deposit the entire enhanced amount with the High Court Registry within four weeks (para 7). The Registrar General is to set apart 8.33% of each respondent's enhanced compensation for release and invest the balance in fixed deposits, subject to the High Court's orders (paras 8-9). Release is without prejudice to the parties' contentions, and the sums must be returned if the appeals succeed (paras 9-10). Regretting that the High Court had not taken up the appeals despite an earlier request for priority, the Court said a roster bench is expected to make a sincere effort once such a request is made, as the unusually large enhancement burdens the Authority and leaves the landowners uncertain (para 11).
Legal Principle
Where an award enhancing land compensation is under appeal, the Supreme Court may, instead of keeping special leave petitions pending, require deposit of the enhanced amount and release only a proportionate part, without prejudice and refundable, while asking the High Court to decide the appeals promptly (paras 7-12).