Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. vs Shakeel Ahmed & Ors.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

9 February 2023

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 739 of 2023

Result

Allowed

Bench

M.R. Shah, C.T. Ravikumar

Citation

[2023] 1 S.C.R. 395 : 2023 INSC 108

Headnote

Land Acquisition – Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) – Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – There was ownership dispute with regard to the land in question – High Court without going into that controversy, and relying upon the Supreme Court decision in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation, allowed writ petition preferred by respondent No.1 and declared that the acquisition proceedings were deemed to have lapsed u/s.24(2) of the Act, 2013 – Held: The High Court ought to have first decided the ownership dispute and thereafter ought to have considered the locus of respondent no.1 – Be that it may, the decision in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation, has been specifically overruled by the Constitution Bench decision of Supreme Court in the case of Indore Development Authority – Applying the law laid down in the case of Indore Development Authority, the twin conditions namely, not taking the possession and not paying the compensation have to be satisfied and if one of the conditions is not satisfied there shall not be any lapse of the acquisition – Once possession of the land in question was taken on 04.03.1983, acquisition proceedings is not deemed to have lapsed – Judgment of High Court unsustainable.

Indore Development Authority vs Manoharlal & Ors. (2020) 8 SCC 129 : [2020] 3 SCR 1 – followed.

Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. v. Harakchand Misrimal Solanki & Ors (2014) 3 SCC 183 – held

overruled.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. R. SHAH, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 3539 of 2015 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition preferred by the respondent No. 1 herein – original writ petitioner and has declared that the land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1894”) with regard to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensa

View Subscription Plans →