Case Note & Summary
The case involves a writ appeal filed by Power Grid Corporation of India Limited against an order dated 25.07.2022 in W.P.No.15495 of 2015. The acquisition proceedings commenced on 07.09.2011 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and an award was passed on 31.07.2012 under Section 11 of the 1894 Act. Notice under Section 12(2) was issued, and the landowner, Satpal Singh Ahluwalia, authorized one Mr. M. Sivakumar to receive compensation, which was received. Possession was taken and the land was utilized for public purpose. Subsequently, a reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act was made to the Sub-Court, Vellore in L.A.O.P.No.8 of 2015. Before the LAOP court, it was contended that interest due was calculated from 15.09.2011 to 25.05.2012, but the landowners were entitled to interest till 31.07.2012. The mistake was rectified by an amended order dated 30.05.2014, adding 9% interest from 26.05.2012 to 31.07.2012. The writ petition sought re-determination of compensation under Section 24(1)(a) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The appellant argued that since the award was passed and compensation received before the 2013 Act came into force, the proceedings were not deemed to have lapsed. The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the writ order, holding that the direction to re-determine compensation was beyond the scope of Section 24(1)(a).
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Lapse of Proceedings - Section 24(1)(a) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Interpretation - The court considered whether acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(1)(a) when an award has been passed and compensation received under the 1894 Act - Held that once an award is passed under Section 11 of the 1894 Act and compensation is received by the landowner, the proceedings are not deemed to have lapsed, and the writ court's direction to re-determine compensation under the 2013 Act was beyond the scope of Section 24(1)(a) (Paras 2-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ court's direction to re-determine compensation under Section 24(1)(a) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 was beyond the scope of the provision, given that an award had been passed and compensation received under the 1894 Act.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The order dated 25.07.2022 in WP.No.15495 of 2015 is set aside. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Law Points
- Section 24(1)(a) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition
- Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act
- 2013
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Section 11
- Section 12(2)
- Section 18
- Lapse of acquisition proceedings
- Compensation determination
Case Details
2026 LawText (MAD) (04) 189
WA No. 1952 of 2022 AND CMP NO. 14254 OF 2022
S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender
Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, Ms.Rita Chadrasekar, Mr.V.Kalyanaraman, Mr.V. Prakash, Ms.Shubharanjani Ananth, Mr.T.Arunkumar
Power Grid Corporation of India Limited
Satpal Singh Ahluwalia, Preet Kamal Ahluwalia, The State Of Tamil Nadu, The Collector, The Revenue Divisional Officer, Special Judge (LAOP) Tribunal
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ appeal against order in writ petition challenging compensation determination under land acquisition.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought to set aside the writ order directing re-determination of compensation under Section 24(1)(a) of the 2013 Act.
Filing Reason
Appellant contended that the writ order was beyond the scope of Section 24(1)(a) as award was passed and compensation received under the 1894 Act.
Previous Decisions
Writ petition allowed on 25.07.2022 in WP.No.15495 of 2015 directing re-determination of compensation.
Issues
Whether the writ court's direction to re-determine compensation under Section 24(1)(a) of the 2013 Act was beyond the scope of the provision.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that acquisition proceedings commenced on 07.09.2011, award passed on 31.07.2012 under Section 11 of 1894 Act, compensation received, possession taken, and thus proceedings not lapsed under Section 24(1)(a).
Respondents argued for re-determination of compensation under the 2013 Act.
Ratio Decidendi
Once an award is passed under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and compensation is received by the landowner, the acquisition proceedings are not deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(1)(a) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The writ court's direction to re-determine compensation under the 2013 Act was beyond the scope of Section 24(1)(a).
Judgment Excerpts
The order under assail is dated 25.07.2022 passed in W.P.No.15495 of 2015.
The 4th respondent in the writ petition Power Grid Corporation of India filed the present intra Court appeal under Clause XV of the Letters Patent mainly on the ground that the impugned writ order as well as the directions issued would fall beyond the scope of Section 24(1)(a) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013.
Procedural History
Acquisition proceedings commenced on 07.09.2011 under 1894 Act. Award passed on 31.07.2012. Compensation received. Reference under Section 18 made to Sub-Court, Vellore in L.A.O.P.No.8 of 2015. Writ petition filed in 2015 seeking re-determination under 2013 Act. Writ allowed on 25.07.2022. Present appeal filed against that order.
Acts & Sections
- Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: Section 24(1)(a)
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 11, Section 12(2), Section 18
