Legalcops – Legal Blog – Business Registrations & Tax Compliances

Hi there,

Land acquisition proceedings shall not lapse if award not made as on commencement of LA Act 2013

Facts

Feeling offended and unsatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 03.07.2017 issued by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in Misc. Bench No.4149 of 2006, by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition to the extent of Plot No.219, 1 bigha, 10 Biswas, and 10 biswansi, Village Malesemau, Tehsil & District Lucknow

The Lucknow Development Authority has preferred the present appeal because the acquisition concerning the said land is deemed to have lapsed under Sub-section (2) of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act 2013’).

 

Argument on behalf of the appellant

The appellant claimed that the Special Land Acquisition Officer had already taken control of the land in question and had transferred it to the Lucknow Development Authority, and that compensation had been placed in the District Judge’s court.

 

Observation of the court

The Bench of Justices MR Shah and MM Sundresh held that the High Court’s position is untenable and relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Indore Development Authority v. Manohar Lal and Ors.,

where it took place –

“There is no lapse of proceedings under Section 24(1) (a) if the award is not made by 1-1-2014, the date of commencement of the 2013 Act. Compensation 1 must be established by the requirements of the 2013 Act.”

In this case, an appeal has been filed against the impugned decision and order of the Allahabad High Court, which held that the purchase of the properties in question had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013, since compensation was not tendered/paid to the original land owners. The Lucknow Development Authority has contested the High Court’s order.

The Supreme Court relied on its judgment in the case of Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal and Ors., (2020) 8 SCC 129 by the Constitution Bench of this Court, and remarked that “It is not possible to say that the land proceedings have lapsed. According to the law established by this Court, the dual conditions of not taking possession and not tendering/paying compensation must be met to trigger Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013. According to the law established by this Court in the aforementioned decision, if one of the prerequisites is not met, the acquisition proceedings are not deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013.”

The Apex Court further stated that the acquisition of the properties in question was deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 only because compensation was not given to the land owners, which is unsustainable.

As a result, the appeal was granted, and the High Court’s order was quashed and set aside.

 

Ratio decidendi

 The Supreme Court has stated that land acquisition procedures will not be terminated if an award is not given as of the commencement of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013.

 

Judgment

As a result, the current appeal is allowed. The initial writ petition filed in front of the High Court has been dismissed.

Original Judgment – C.A. No. 8887/2022 – D.No. 26607 / 2022 12-Dec-2022

 

Written by M.Sahithi, GITAM School Of Law

 

Leave a Comment

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