INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
NEW DELHI: A 3-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday turned down the Centre's objections to its seeking to scrutinise a verdict of
another bench of the same strength which had upheld the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, saying that its decision was not unprecedented
and pointing out to the apex court having done a similar exercise on the interpretation of land acquisition law.Addressing the Centre's
stiff opposition to the hearing after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had submitted that the scrutiny of a 3-judge bench by another bench of
A three-judge bench had earlier also differed with another three-judge bench and the matter was referred to a larger bench
order passed by a three-judge bench on February 8, 2018 declaring the previous 2014 judgement, also by a three-judge bench, as per incuriam
(without care for law or facts)
The divergent views of the two benches was on the interpretation of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.A bench of Justices R M Lodha, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph had in 2014 held that
compensation paid to the landowners.A bench of Justices Arun Mishra, Adarsh Kumar Goel and Mohan M Shantanagoudar in 2018 expressed its
disagreement with the 2014 ruling and held that it needed to be re-examined and referred the controversy to a five-judge bench for
