Supreme Court Quashes High Court Order Declaring Land Acquisition Lapsed Due to Non-Payment of Compensation. Court Clarifies Conditions for Lapse Under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a land acquisition case where the Government of NCT of Delhi challenged a High Court order that declared the acquisition of land lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The original acquisition notification was issued on 10.11.1960, followed by a declaration in 1969 and an award in 1983. The respondents filed a writ petition in 2015, claiming the acquisition had lapsed due to non-payment of compensation. The High Court ruled in favor of the respondents, relying on the Pune Municipal Corporation case, which was later overruled by the Supreme Court in the Indore Development Authority case. The Supreme Court emphasized that both conditions of possession and compensation must be unmet for a lapse to occur. Since possession was taken in 1983, the court found the High Court's ruling to be incorrect. The Supreme Court quashed the High Court's order and allowed the appeal, stating that the acquisition proceedings were valid.

Headnote

A) Land Acquisition - Lapse of Acquisition - Conditions for Lapse - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Section 24(2) - The court held that for the lapse of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2), both conditions of not taking possession and not tendering compensation must be satisfied. Since possession was taken in 1983, the High Court's declaration of lapse was unsustainable. Held that the appeal was allowed and the High Court's order was quashed (Paras 1-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the acquisition of land is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the High Court's order declaring the acquisition lapsed, and stated that the acquisition proceedings were valid as possession was taken in 1983.

Law Points

  • Land Acquisition
  • Compensation
  • Lapse of Acquisition
  • Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition
  • Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act
  • 2013
  • Land Acquisition Act
  • 1894
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (SC) (12) 86

Civil Appeal No. 9229 of 2022

2022-12-15

M. R. Shah, S. Ravindra Bhat

Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Mohd. Maqbool & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Challenge to the High Court's order regarding land acquisition.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to quash the High Court's declaration of lapse of acquisition.

Filing Reason

The writ petition was filed challenging the acquisition proceedings.

Previous Decisions

The High Court had allowed the writ petition based on the Pune Municipal Corporation case.

Issues

Whether the acquisition of land is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013. Whether the conditions for lapse of acquisition proceedings were satisfied.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that possession was taken in 1983, thus the acquisition could not lapse. The respondents contended that compensation was not paid, leading to the lapse of acquisition.

Ratio Decidendi

For the lapse of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013, both conditions of not taking possession and not tendering compensation must be satisfied. If either condition is met, there is no lapse.

Judgment Excerpts

the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013. the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is unsustainable and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.

Procedural History

The High Court allowed the writ petition on 01.12.2015, leading to the present appeal by the Government of NCT of Delhi.

Acts & Sections

  • Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: 24(2)
  • Land Acquisition Act, 1894: 4, 6, 31
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Partially Allows Landowners' Appeals for Enhanced Compensation. Compensation for Lands Acquired in 1976 Set at Rs.28.12 paisa per square yard, Modifying Previous High Court Orders.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Pay Scale Fitment for Employees Due to Lack of Merit. Fitment Increments for Old Employees Validated as Necessary for Equitable Salary Adjustments Under Civil Services.