High Court Bench Expected To Sincerely Endeavour To Expedite Decision Once Priority Hearing Is Requested: Supreme Court

Expressing regret over the pace of first appeals concerning land acquired for the Shatabdi Nagar Housing Scheme in 1987, the Court requested the Allahabad High Court to decide them as early as possible and, subject to its convenience, preferably within six months.

The Court was hearing a batch of special leave petitions filed by the Meerut Development Authority against interim orders passed by the Allahabad High Court in its pending first appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu observed: “Before parting, we cannot turn a blind eye to the pace at which the pending first appeals are being dealt with in the High Court. As noted, the acquisition proceedings in the present case date back to the year 1987. We note with a sense of regret that, despite a specific request made in the said order to ensure hearing of the appeals on a priority basis, the High Court could not take up the same for hearing. The required alacrity, it is submitted, is missing”.

The Bench added: We are not unmindful of the heavy burden on each bench of the High Court; yet, once a request is made, it is expected of the roster bench to make a sincere endeavour to expedite its decision on the appeals. Be that as it may, we say no more in this behalf; however, we request the High Court once again to assign some priority to the first appeals preferred by the petitioner”.

Background

The acquisition proceedings concerned land acquired for the Shatabdi Nagar Housing Scheme in 1987. By an award passed in February 1990, the Special Land Acquisition Officer determined compensation at Rs. 20 and Rs. 27 per square yard for lands in the respective villages. On references sought by the landowners, the Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 690 and Rs. 720 per square yard through an award passed in March 2024.

The Authority challenged the enhanced compensation through first appeals pending before the Allahabad High Court. The interim orders challenged before the Supreme Court stayed implementation of the Reference Court’s award on the condition that the Authority deposit half of the enhanced compensation in cash and furnish security for the remaining half. The High Court permitted the landowners to receive the amount deposited in cash.

The Supreme Court also considered an order passed by a coordinate Bench in similar proceedings in April 2026. That order permitted the landowners to receive Rs. 50 lakh out of enhanced compensation of approximately Rs. 6 crore, representing about 8.33% of the enhanced amount.

Court’s Observations

Interim Arrangement To Maintain Parity

The Court observed that the special leave petitions arose from interim orders in first appeals that remained pending before the High Court. It held that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitions pending and decided to dispose of them while maintaining parity with the earlier coordinate-Bench order.

The Court directed: “However, with a view to maintaining parity with the directions issued in the said order, these petitions stand disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to deposit the entire enhanced sum, as awarded by the Reference Court in favour of the present respondents, with the Registry of the High Court within a period of four weeks from date.”

The Court directed the High Court’s Registrar General to set apart 8.33% of the enhanced compensation payable to each respondent after the deposit was made. It directed that the balance be invested in separate interest-bearing fixed-deposit accounts with a nationalised bank on an auto-renewal basis, subject to further orders in the pending appeals.

The Court directed that the set-apart amount be remitted to the respective landowners in accordance with law. The Court clarified: “Release and receipt of such sum shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the pending first appeals.”

The Court further stated that if the Authority succeeded in the first appeals, the respective landowners would have to return the amount released to them.

Priority Request Requires Sincere Endeavour By Roster Bench

The Court expressed regret that the High Court had been unable to hear the appeals despite a specific request in the earlier coordinate-Bench order that they be taken up on priority. The Court acknowledged the heavy burden on every High Court Bench but stated that the roster Bench was expected to make a sincere endeavour to expedite its decision once such a request was made.

The Court observed that the Reference Court’s unusually large enhancement imposed a huge financial liability upon the Authority while leaving the landowners uncertain about the compensation that would ultimately attain finality.

The Court consequently observed: “In view thereof, it would be in the fitness of things if the High Court takes up the batch of first appeals relating to Shatabdi Nagar Housing Scheme on priority basis and decides the same as early as possible, and subject to its convenience, preferably within six months from the date of communication of this order. Ordered accordingly.”

Further Release May Be Sought If Appeals Remain Pending

The Court preserved a further remedy for the landowners if the High Court could not decide the appeals within the indicated period for valid reasons.

The Court directed: “If, for valid reasons, the High Court is unable to dispose of the appeals within six months, we grant liberty to the respondents to seek release of such further sum the High Court may deem fit and proper to grant.”

The Court also directed its Registry to communicate the order to the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court for placement before the Chief Justice for information and, if required, issuance of administrative directions to ensure compliance.

Conclusion

The Court disposed of the special leave petitions and directed the Meerut Development Authority to deposit the entire enhanced compensation with the Allahabad High Court Registry within four weeks. It directed release of 8.33% to the respective landowners, without prejudice to the pending appeals and subject to repayment if the Authority succeeded, while requiring the balance to be invested in separate interest-bearing fixed deposits.

The Court requested the High Court to prioritise the Shatabdi Nagar first appeals and decide them as early as possible, subject to its convenience and preferably within six months from communication of the order. If the appeals could not be decided within that period for valid reasons, the Court granted the landowners liberty to seek release of a further sum that the High Court considered fit and proper.

Cause Title: Meerut Development Authority v. Parmeshwar Dayal and Another (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 1106)

Click here to read/download Judgment