Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: s.24(2) – Land Acquisition – Specific case of Land acquisition Collector (LAC) before High Court that possession of land in question was taken over by the LAC and was handed over to DDA – High Court also believed the taking over of the possession by the LAC, but thereafter on the ground that the compensation was not tendered to the original writ petitioners, High Court declared that the acquisition is deemed to have lapsed under s.24(2) of the Act, 2013 – Appeal by LAC – Held: Before the High Court, a counter affidavit was filed by LAC as well as DDA in which it was specifically mentioned that the land in question was handed over to DDA on 26.05.1998 and therefore, the acquisition is complete and the lands vest in the Government and free from any encumbrances – Nothing is on record that at any point of time, the original writ petitioners made any grievance that the possession taken over on 26.05.1998 was not lawful – Even High Court in impugned judgment believed the stand taken by the LAC that the possession of the subject land was taken over – Under the circumstances, it is not permissible on the part of the original writ petitioners to now contend that the possession taken over on 26.05.1998 was not lawful – The view taken by the High Court that the acquisition is deemed to have lapsed under s.24(2) of the Act, 2013 on the ground that though the possession of the subject lands was taken over but the compensation in respect of the subject lands was not tendered is contrary to the Constitution Bench decision of this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors. – Order of High Court is set aside. Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. Before the High Court, a counter affidavit was filed by LAC as well as DDA and in which it was specifically ORS.
mentioned that the land in question was handed over to DDA on 26.05.1998 and therefore, the acquisition is complete and the lands vest in the Government and free from any encumbrances. Nothing is on record that any rejoinder affidavit was filed on behalf of the original writ petitioners to the counter affidavit filed by the LAC or DDA. Nothing is on record that at any point of time, the original writ petitioners – predecessors made any grievance that the possession taken over on 26.05.1998 was not lawful. Even the High Court in the impugned judgment and order has believed the stand taken by the LAC that the possession of the subject land has been taken over. Under the circumstances, it is too late and/or not permissible on the part of the original writ petitioners to now contend that the possession taken over on 26.05.1998 was not lawful. [Para 5][755-F-H; 756-A]
2. In the present case, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued in 1964 and the award was declared on 10.12.1997 and the possession was handed over to DDA on 26.05.1998. So far as the submission on behalf of the original writ petitioners that “in the possession certificate dated 26.05.1998, there was no mention of taking over of possession of the subject lands by the Land Acquisition Collector from the original writ petitioners – predecessors” is concerned, mere nonmention of taking over of possession cannot be a ground not to believe the possession certificate in which it is specifically mentioned that the possession of the land in question is handed over to the DDA. What is relevant is handing over of the possession to the DDA. [Para 5.1][756-B-D]
3. The view taken by the High Court that the acquisition is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 on the ground that though the possession of the subject lands has been taken over but the compensation in respect of the subject lands has not been tendered is just contrary to the Constitution Bench decision of this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and Ors. [Para 5.2][756-E-F]
Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors. (2020) 8 SCC 129 : [2020] 3 SCR 1 – followed. E.LA. Aboobacker and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors. (2018) 18 SCC 560 : [2018] 12 SCR 263 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.