IMPORTANT POINT
In absence of actual payment of compensation to landowners/persons interested or deposit in the court for more than five years, the acquisition proceedings will lapse. Deposit in government treasury is of no avail.

Headnote:(a) Interpretation of statute - Words - 'Paid' in section 24(2) Act, 2013 - Different than offered or tendered - However 'paid' cannot be construed to be receipt of compensation by the landowners/persons interested - Having regard to section 31(2) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 compensation may be said to have been "paid" when the Collector discharged his obligation and deposited the amount of compensation in court and made that amount available to the interested person to be dealt with as provided in Sections 32 and 33 of the Act, 1894 (Para 17)
       (b) Interpretation of statute - Expropriatory legislation - Like Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Have to be strictly followed. (Para 18)
       AIR 1936 PC 253(2) - Relied upon
       (c) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 24(2) - Deposit in Government treasury is not sufficient - Amount of compensation should be deposited in the court (Para 19)
       (d) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 24(2) - Award made more than five years prior to act 2013 - Compensation neither paid to landowners/persons interested nor deposited in the court - Deposit of compensation amount in the government treasury is of no avail - Subject land acquisition proceedings - Deemed to have lapsed. (Para 20)
       (2011) 11 SCC 506; (1996) 2 SCC 71 - Relied upon
       (e) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 114(1) and 24(2) r/w section 6, General Clauses Act - Section 114(1) repealing Land Acquisition Act, 1894 making section 6 of General Clauses Act with regard to effect of repeal - But making such applicability subject to Section 24(2) - Therefore proceedings not saved due to non-payment for more than five years. (Para 21)
       Facts of the case:
       The expression: "compensation has not been paid" occurring in Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act comes up for interpretation in this case.
       Lands were acquired and award was made. However compensation was not paid and became overdue, more than five years on the Act 2013 coming into force. The landowners invoked section 24(2) to get a declaration that the acquisition proceeding have lapsed.
       Finding of the Court:
       Deposit in government treasury does not amount to 'paid'. Compensation should either be paid actually or deposited in the court.
       Result : Appeals dismissed.

Judgement Key Points

Judgment overruled: This judgment has been overruled by a subsequent Supreme Court decision.
Core issue: Interpretation of the expression "compensation has not been paid" in Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (2013 Act), in relation to land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1894 Act). [1000537360001][1000537360023]
Factual background: Proposal for acquisition of 43.94 acres for "Forest Garden" development approved in 2002; Section 4 notification in 2004; Section 6 declaration in 2005; award under Section 11 made on 31.01.2008. Landowners challenged proceedings; High Court quashed acquisition on various grounds. Compensation not paid to landowners; Rs.27 crores deposited in government treasury. [1000537360003] (!) [1000537360004][1000537360006]
Landowners' argument: Award made more than five years before 2013 Act commencement (01.01.2014); no payment or court deposit; proceedings lapse under Section 24(2). [1000537360005]
Authority's argument: Compensation offered via notices; deposited in treasury due to non-receipt; no default; Section 114(2) saves concluded proceedings. [1000537360006]
Section 24(1) of 2013 Act: Overrides other provisions; no award = 2013 Act compensation applies; award made = proceedings continue under 1894 Act. (!) (!) (!) [1000537360009]
Section 24(2) of 2013 Act: Overrides Section 24(1); if award ≥5 years prior to 2013 Act and (i) no physical possession or (ii) compensation not paid, proceedings lapse; fresh acquisition possible under 2013 Act. Proviso for majority non-deposit. (!) (!) [1000537360010]
Section 31 of 1894 Act: Collector must tender payment post-award; if contingencies (non-consent, incompetence, dispute), deposit in court for Section 18 reference. (!) (!) (!) [1000537360011][1000537360013][1000537360014]
Meaning of "paid" in Section 24(2): Not mere tender/offer; not requiring actual receipt by landowners. "Paid" when Collector deposits in court per Section 31(2) contingencies, making funds available under Sections 32-33. Literal construction avoided to respect 1894 Act procedure. [1000537360016] (!)
Strict compliance for expropriatory laws: 1894 Act procedures (Sections 31-34) mandatory; must follow prescribed mode. [1000537360017]
Deposit in treasury insufficient: Not equivalent to payment or court deposit; proceedings lapse where award >5 years old, no possession/payment/court deposit. [1000537360018][1000537360019]
Section 114(2) of 2013 Act: Repeal subject to 2013 Act provisions; Section 24(2) legal fiction prevails over General Clauses Act Section 6; no savings for lapsed proceedings. [1000537360020]
Outcome: Appeals dismissed; acquisition proceedings deemed lapsed under Section 24(2). No need to review High Court merits. [1000537360019][1000537360021][1000537360022]

Judgment :-

R.M. Lodha, J.

Delay condoned in S.L.P. (C) Nos.15847-15855 of 2010. Leave granted.

2. In these 18 appeals, by special leave, it is argued on behalf of the respondents-landowners that in view of Section 24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, ‘2013 Act’) which has come into effect on 01.01.2014, the subject land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘1894 Act’) have lapsed. The question for decision relates to true meaning of the expression:

“compensation has not been paid” occurring in Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

3. It may not be necessary at all to go into the legality and correctness of the impugned judgment, if the subject land acquisition proceedings are held to have lapsed. We, therefore, deal with this aspect first.

4. The brief facts necessary for consideration of the above question are these. On 06.08.2002, the proposal of the Municipal Commissioner, Pune Municipal Corporation (for short, “Corporation”) duly approved by the Standing Committee for acquisition of lands admeasuring 43.94 acres for development of “Forest Garden” was sent to the Collector, Pune. The Collector sanctioned the proposal and on 20.02.2003 forwarded the same to Special Land Acquisition Officer (15), Pune for further action.

On 30.09.2004, the notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act was published in the official gazette. Then notices under Section 4(1) were served upon the landowners/interested persons. On 26.12.2005, the declaration under Section 6 was published in the official gazette and on 02.02.2006, it was also published at the site and on the notice board of the Office of Talaltti. Following the notices under Section 9, on 31.01.2008 the Special Land Acquisition Officer made the award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act.

5. The landowners challenged the above acquisition proceedings before the Bombay High Court in 9 writ petitions. Of them, 2 were filed before making award and 7 after the award. The challenge to the acquisition proceedings and the validity of the award was laid on diverse grounds including (i) absence of resolution of the General Body of the Corporation; (ii) non-compliance with the provisions of Section 5A, (iii) non-compliance with the provisions of Section 7, and (iv) lapsing of acquisition proceedings under Section 11A. The High Court on consideration of the arguments advanced before it by the parties has held that the acquisition proceedings for the development of “Forest Garden” could not be initiated by the Commissioner with the mere approval of the Standing Committee without resolution of the General Body of the Corporation. The acquisition proceedings were also held bad in law for non-compliance of Section 7 and other statutory breaches. Inter alia, the High Court has quashed the acquisition proceedings and gave certain directions including restoration of possession.

6. It is argued on behalf of the landowners that by virtue of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, the subject acquisition shall be deemed to have been lapsed because the award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act is made more than five years prior to the commencement of 2013 Act and no compensation has been paid to the owners nor the amount of compensation has been deposited in the court by the Special Land Acquisition Officer.

7. On the other hand, on behalf of the Corporation and so also for the Collector, it is argued that the award was made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 31.01.2008 strictly in terms of 1894 Act and on the very day the landowners were informed regarding the quantum of compensation for their respective lands. Notices were also issued to the landowners to reach the office of the Special Land Acquisition Officer and receive the amount of compensation and since they neither received the compensation nor any request came from them to make reference to the District Court under Section 18, the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2014 Supreme(SC) 54

IMPORTANT POINTIn absence of actual payment of compensation to landowners/persons interested or deposit in the court for more than five years, the acquisition proceedings will lapse. Deposit in government treasury is of no avail.

Cases Referred (3)

IMPORTANT POINT
In absence of actual payment of compensation to landowners/persons interested or deposit in the court for more than five years, the acquisition proceedings will lapse. Deposit in government treasury is of no avail.