Vide notification dated 23.06.1989 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (For short, ‘the Act’)
large chunk of the land measuring about 3,500 Hectares was sought to be acquired for planned development of part of Delhi.
The writ petition came to be filed in the year 2015 referring to Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short “the 2013 Act”) claiming that the possession of land having not been taken and the compensation not paid, the acquisition has lapsed.
The arguments raised by learned counsel appearing for the appellant are that in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in Indore Development Authority vs Manoharlal and Others (2020) 8 SCC 129 whereby earlier judgment of this Court in Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr.’s case (supra) was overruled the order passed by the High Court is to be set aside.
There is no dispute on the fact that the judgment of this Court in Pune Municipal Corporation and Another’s case (supra), was relied upon by the High Court to hold that the acquisition in question had lapsed. Under the provisions of Section 24(1)(a) in case the award is not made as on 1-1-2014, the date of commencement of the 2013 Act, there is no lapse of proceedings.
The deemed lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act takes place where due to inaction of authorities for five years or more prior to commencement of the said Act, the possession of land has not been taken nor compensation has been paid.
In case a person has been tendered the compensation as provided under Section 31(1) of the 1894 Act, it is not open to him to claim that acquisition has lapsed under Section 24(2) due to non-payment or non-deposit of compensation in court. Once award has been passed on taking possession under Section 16 of the 1894 Act, the land vests in State there is no divesting provided under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, as once possession has been taken there is no lapse under Section 24(2).
Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act does not give rise to new cause of action to question the legality of concluded proceedings of land acquisition.
Initially, the stand sought to be taken by the writ petitioner before the High Court was that the physical possession of the land had not been taken, however, the same was given up.
Case Title: DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. BATTI (2023 INSC 276)
Case Number: C.A. No.-001918-001918 / 2023
