Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) – As per Land Acquisition Collector the possession of the major portion of the land acquired was taken and notice u/s. 12 (2) LA Act was issued to the original writ petitioner, but he did not come to collect the compensation, then the same was sent to Revenue Deposit – High Court relied upon the Supreme Court decision in case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors. declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed u/s.24(2) of the Act, 2013 observing that even though possession of the major portion was taken, there was no categorical statement that payment of compensation was made with law applicable – Held: The case relied on by High Court has been overruled by the subsequent Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development authority v. Manoharlal and Ors. – Applying the law laid down by the Supreme Court and considering the facts of the case, the impugned judgment and the order passed by the High Court unsustainable – Accordingly, set aside – There shall be no deemed lapse of the acquisition with respect to the land in question u/s. 24(2) of the Act, 2013.
Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors. (2020) 8 SCC 129 : [2020] 3 SCR 1 – followed.
Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors. (2014) 3 SCC 183 : [2014]
1 SCR 783 – 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.