Deemed lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

1 and 2 herein

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/gujarat-sales-tax-supreme-court-upholds-mandatory-penalty-for-raw-material-misuse/

and has declared that the acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1894”) with regard to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2013”), the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has preferred the present appeal. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors., (2014) 3

SCC 183, it was held that the depositing of the amount of compensation with the Reference Court cannot be regarded as compensation having been paid to the landowners and the High Court by the impugned judgment and order has allowed the writ petition and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed as actual physical possession of the subject land has not been taken over by the land acquiring agency.

Even the possession of the land in question was taken over by drawing the panchnama, which is a permissible mode as observed and held by this Court in the Constitution Bench decision in the case of Indore Development Authority Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, (2014) 3 SCC 183] is hereby overruled and all other decisions in which Pune Municipal Corpn.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/acquisition-of-land-and-deemed-lapse-under-the-act-2013/

Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, (2014) 3 SCC 183] has been followed, are also overruled.

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. The consequence of non-deposit is provided in the proviso to Section 24(2)

in case it has not been deposited with respect to majority of landholdings then all beneficiaries (landowners) as on the date of notification for land acquisition under Section 4 of the 1894 Act shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of the 2013 Act.

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).

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/taxation-of-engineering-design-drawings-goods-or-services/

The provisions of Section 24(2) providing for a deemed lapse of proceedings are applicable in case authorities have failed due to their inaction to take possession and pay compensation for five years or more before the 2013 Act came into force, in a proceeding for land acquisition pending with the authority concerned as on 1-1-2014. Present appeal is accordingly allowed.

Case Title: DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. RAJESH DUA (2023 INSC 68)

Case Number: C.A. No.-000363-000363 / 2023

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *