Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: s.24(2) – High Court declared that the acquisition of lands in question deemed to have lapsed under s.24(2) of the Act, 2013 – Held: High Court failed to notice and consider the specific case on behalf of the State that at the relevant time, the possession could not be taken over due to the pending proceedings at the instance of the landowners challenging the acquisition proceedings, which ended upto this Court – Original landowners failed in challenge to the acquisition proceedings upto this Court – Under the circumstances, when due to pendency of the land acquisition proceedings, the possession could not be taken over, thereafter, it will not be open for the landowners to contend that as the possession was not taken over, the land acquisition proceedings be deemed to have lapsed under s.24(2) of the Act, 2013 – In view of Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors., the impugned judgment passed by the High Court declaring that the land acquisition proceedings with respect to the land in question has lapsed under s.24(2) of the Act, 2013 is unsustainable – Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: The original landowners failed in challenging the acquisition proceedings upto this Court. Under the circumstances, when due to pendency of the land acquisition proceedings, the possession could not be taken over, thereafter, it will not be open for the landowners to contend that as the possession was not taken over, the land acquisition proceedings be deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court declaring that the land acquisition proceedings with respect to the land in question has lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 is unsustainable ORS.
and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside and is accordingly quashed and set aside. [Paras 2.1, 3][632-B-C; 634D]
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.