Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: s. 24(2) – Land acquisition, when deemed to have lapsed – Acquisition proceedings initiated under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Writ petitions u/s. 24(2) claiming that acquisition under the 1894 Act had lapsed as neither the possession was taken nor the compensation therefor has been paid – High Courts relying on the Pune Municipal Corporation’s case held that the acquisition has lapsed as the compensation was not paid to the land owners – On appeal, held: The Constitution Bench judgment in Indore Development Authority’s case overruling the Pune Municipal Corporation’s case held that satisfaction of either of the conditions namely taking possession of the acquired land or payment of compensation to the landowners would be sufficient to save the acquisition from being lapsed in terms of s. 24(2) – On facts, the land was handed over to the Delhi Development Authority, as such one of the conditions was satisfied – In view thereof, there is no deemed lapse and the acquisition is sustained – Order of the High Court not sustainable and is set aside – Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and Ors, (2020) 8 SCC 129 – followed.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi Vs. Manav Dharma Trust and Another (2017) 6 SCC 751 : [2017] 4 SCR 232; Pune Municipal Corporation & Another Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & Ors. (2014) 3 SCC 183 : [2014] 1 SCR 783; Shiv Kumar Vs. Union of India (2019) 10 SCC 229 – 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.