From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court it appears that though it was submitted before the High Court that the possession of the land in question was taken on 16.03.2004, however thereafter relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, (2014) 3 SCC 183] is hereby overruled and all other decisions in which Pune Municipal Corpn.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/dispute-over-back-wages-high-court-sets-aside-order-of-cgit/
The decision in Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Assn.
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. The consequence of non-deposit is provided in the proviso to Section 24(2)
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/challenge-to-dismissal-of-revision-application-in-criminal-case/
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). It does not revive stale and time-barred claims and does not reopen concluded proceedings nor allow landowners to question the legality of mode of taking possession to reopen proceedings or mode of deposit of compensation in the treasury instead of court to invalidate acquisition.”
In view of the above Constitution Bench decision of this Court in the case of the Indore Development Authority (supra), the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is unsustainable and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside and is accordingly quashed and set aside.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/lapse-of-land-acquisition-under-section-242-of-the-act-2013/
No costs.
Case Title: LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR SOUTH EAST Vs. DHARAMVIR (2022 INSC 1270)
Case Number: C.A. No.-008992-008992 / 2022
