MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. PARMESHWAR DAYAL & ANR.

NON-REPORTABLE 2026 INSC 1106 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 12994 OF 2026

MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY … PETITIONER

PARMESHWAR DAYAL & ANR. … RESPONDENTS

WITH

SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30365/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30167/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30166/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 29777/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 29870/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30188/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30159/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30366/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30158/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 29869/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30165/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30777/2026, SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30760/2026 AND SLP (CIVIL) NO. OF 2026 @ D.NO. 30596/2026

ORDER

DIPANKAR DATTA, J.

1. Delay condoned in SLP (C) Diary Nos. 30365, 30167, 30166, 29777, Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by MANIK KUMAR Date: 2026.10.09 16:29:08 IST Reason: 29870, 30188, 30159, 30366, 30158, 29869, 30165, 30777, 30760,

2. We have heard Mr. P. S. Patwalia, learned senior counsel for the

petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respective

respondents.

3. The present batch of special leave petitions arises from proceedings

for acquisition of lands dating back to 1987 under the Shatabdi Nagar

Housing Scheme. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Meerut vide

award dated 22nd February, 1990, originally determined the

compensation for the acquired lands at Rs. 20/- and Rs. 27/- per

square yard. Dissatisfied with the said determination, the landowners

sought references. The Presiding Officer, Land Acquisition,

Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Meerut1, by its award dated

30th March, 2024, enhanced the compensation to Rs. 690/- and Rs.

720/- per square yard for the respective villages.

4. Different amounts have been determined in respect of different

landowners by the Reference Court. Mr. Patwalia has placed a chart in

this regard, which is taken on record and marked Appendix-I to this

order.

5. The aforementioned award of the Reference Court is presently under

challenge before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad2 in a batch

of First Appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. In

the interregnum, the High Court, vide the impugned interim orders

(for instance, order dated 17th September, 2025 in First Appeal No.

717 of 2025), has stayed the implementation of the impugned award

provided the petitioner deposits 50% of the enhanced amount of

compensation awarded by the Reference Court in cash, and furnishes

security for the remaining 50%. The High Court has further permitted

the claimants to receive the whole amount deposited in cash, and the

balance is subject to the final decision in the pending appeals.

6. Pertinently, an order dated 24th April, 20263, passed in a similar

proceeding4 by a coordinate Bench of this Court (of which one of us,

Dipankar Datta, J. was a member) has been placed before us. In the

said order, out of the enhanced amount of approximately Rs. 6 crore,

Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakh) only was directed to be released to

the landowners, subject to certain conditions. The amount directed for

release represents approximately 8.33% of the total enhanced

amount.

7. Since the special leave petitions arise out of appeals which are pending

before the High Court, we are of the considered opinion that no useful

purpose would be served in keeping the same pending. 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.

8. Once such a deposit is made, the Registrar General shall set apart a

sum equivalent to 8.33% of the enhanced amount of compensation

3 the said order 4 Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 15370 of 2026 and connected matters

awarded to the respective respondents, and invest the balance sum in

separate interest-bearing fixed deposit accounts of a nationalised bank

on an auto-renewal basis and subject to further orders to be passed

by the High Court in the first appeals that are pending before it.

9. The set-apart sum, representing 8.33% of the enhanced compensation

which has been awarded in favour of each of the respondents, shall be

remitted to them in accordance with law. Release and receipt of such

sum shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the

parties in the pending first appeals.

10. It is also recorded that should the first appeals succeed, the said

released sum shall be returned to the petitioner by the respective

respondents.

11. 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. 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,

having regard to the fact that the Reference Court has enhanced the

compensation by an unusually large margin which, on the one hand,

burdens the petitioner with a huge financial liability while, on the other,

leaves the respondents in a state of uncertainty as to what

compensation will finally attain finality. 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.

12. 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.

13. The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the

Registrar General of the High Court for placing the same before the

Chief Justice for information and, if required, for issuance of necessary

administrative directions to ensure due compliance.

14. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

…………………………….J. DIPANKAR DATTA

…………………………….J. SHEEL NAGU NEW DELHI; OCTOBER 08, 2026.

APPENDIX-I

DATA FURNISHED BY MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN RESPECT OF DIFFERENT SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION PENDING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS HON’BLE COURT SATABDI NAGAR YOJANA

ASSESSED PAYMENT DECRETAL PAYMENT REFEREN COMPENSATI AMOUNT AT AMOUNT MADE BY CE NO. / CAUSE TITLE ON AMOUNT THE RATE OF PAYABLE AS BALANCE SL. SLP NO. LARA COURT, ENQUIRY ALONGWITH THE PREVIOUSLY ₹165 / 690 PER PER LARA AMOUNT TO NO. (DIARY) MEERUT / NO. / APPEAL NO. PAID BY ADM SQ. GAJ COURT, BE PAID DEVELOPMEN APPEAL (LAO) UNDER MEERUT T AUTHORITY NO. SETTLEMENT JUDGMENT DATED _____ FA No. 718 (sic, 717) D No. (sic, SLP of 2025 MDA Vs. 406 / 92,

1. (C) No.) 12994 of 53,343.95 - 29,85,161.85 14,92,580.00 14,92,580.00 PARMESHWAR Ex-405 / 25 2026 DAYAL FA No. 732 of 2025 RAMA CO- D No. 30365 of 652 / 97,

2. OPERATIVE 35,69,193.70 - 19,97,34,446.06 - 19,97,34,446.06 2026 Ex-406 / 25 HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. D. No. 30167 of FA No. 714 of 2025 62 / 97, Ex-

3. 19,640.00 - 7,93,745.18 - 7,93,745.18 2026 ASHISH KUMAR 408 / 25 FA No. 716 of 2025 411 / 92,

4. D No. 30166/2026 MDA Vs. AJAY 61,345.00 - 34,32,949.24 - 34,32,949.24 Ex-403 / 25 KUMAR FA No. 728 of 2025 405 / 92,

5. D No. 29777/2026 MDA Vs. MANISH 5,69,567.64 - 3,18,73,379.60 - 3,18,73,379.60 Ex-411 / 25 GUPTA

FA No. 720 of 2025 D No. 29870 / 404 / 92,

6. MDA Vs. MANISH 2,79,271.32 - 1,62,82,699.00 - 1,62,82,699.00 2026 Ex-409 / 25 KUMAR FA No. 734 of 2025 D No. 30188 / 412 / 92,

7. MDA Vs. AKHIL 24,247.00 - 13,56,891.61 - 13,56,891.61 2026 Ex-407 / 25 KUMAR FA No. 724 of 2025 D No. 30159 / 65 / 97, Ex-

8. MDA Vs. 19,640.00 - 7,93,745.18 - 7,93,745.18 2026 415 / 25 MEENAKSHI FA No. 728 of 2025 MDA Vs. PARTAPUR D No. 30366 / 648 / 97,

9. CO-OPERATIVE 7,37,116.00 - 17,72,10,045.00 - 17,72,10,045.00 2026 Ex-412 / 25 INDUSTRIAL STATE LTD FA No. 718 of 2025 D No. 30158 / MDA Vs. 400 / 92,

10. 9,31,044.00 - 6,94,72,850.80 - 6,94,72,850.80 2026 PARMESHWAR Ex-413 / 25 DAYAL FA No. 729 of 2025 D No. 29869 / 402 / 92,

11. MDA Vs. MANISH 5,43,138.15 - 3,03,94,372.00 - 3,03,94,372.00 2026 Ex-404 / 25 GUPTA FA No. 723 of 2025 D No. 30165 / 603 / 97,

12. MDA Vs. TARUN 1,24,060.00 - 51,13,828.13 - 51,13,828.13 2026 Ex-414 / 25 GUPTA FA No. 731 of 2025 D No. 30777 / 407 / 92,

13. MDA Vs. 23,277.00 - 13,02,615.00 - 13,02,615.00 2026 Ex- PARMANAND FA No. 719 of 2025 D No. 30760 / 651 / 97,

14. MDA Vs. MDA Vs. 6,48,204.54 - 466,77,071.63 - 4,66,77,071.63 2026 Ex- MANISH GUPTA FA No. 715 of 2025 D No. 30596 /

15. MDA Vs. ASHISH 1,50,575.35 - 60,85,379.75 - 60,85,379.75 67 / 97, Ex- 2026 KUMAR TOTAL Rs.77,53,663.65 ₹59,35,09,179.73 14,92,580.00 ₹59,20,16,598.18