SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V. GOPALA GOWDA, C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.
RAM KISHAN & ORS – APPELLANTS
Vs.
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS – RESPONDENTS
I.A.NOS. 3-4 OF 2014 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.3872 OF 2010
Decided on: 27-11-2014
(2014) 3 SCC 183; (2014) 6 SCC 583; (2014) 6 SCC 564; 2014 (10) SCALE 388 – Relied upon
(2014) 6 SCC 586 – Referred
Facts of the case:
The appellant nos. 24-28 are the owners and in possession of the land in question. The appellants have been in continuous possession of the aforesaid land in question till date and harvesting crops.
On 20.01.2003 the respondents published a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Thereafter on 16.01.2004, the respondents issued notification under Section 6 of the L.A. Act. The Land Acquisition Collector passed an award dated 14.01.2006.
The appellants challenged the said notification in the High Court. The High Court dismissed the writ petition by assigning untenable reasons.
Finding of the Court:
The acquisition proceeding has lapsed.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Judgment
V.GOPALA GOWDA, J.
1. I.A. No. 4 for exemption from filing official translation is ordered.
2. I.A. No.3 in Civil Appeal No. 3872 of 2010 is filed by the applicants/appellant Nos. 24-28 (for short ‘the applicants’) seeking direction and appropriate orders for disposal of this appeal in terms of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short ‘the Act of 2013’). The appellant-land owners have come to this Court questioning the correctness of the judgment and order dated 13.03.2008 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition No.3823 of 2008, wherein the writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the same was not maintainable after passing of the Award.
3. The brief facts are mentioned hereunder. The appellant nos. 24-28 are the owners and in possession of the land in question bearing khewat no. 260 Khasra no.46 killa nos.1(3-18), 2(7-14), 3/1(0-16), 8/2(0-16), 9(8-0), 10(6-1) and 26(0-5) totally measuring 27 kanals 13 marlas of land situated in the revenue estate of Village Kumashpur Tehsil and Distict Sonipat (Haryana). The appellants have been in continuous possession of the aforesaid land in question till date and harvesting crops.
4. On 20.01.2003 the respondents published a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the L.A. Act’) bearing No. LAC (F)-NTLA/2003/137. Thereafter on 16.01.2004, the respondents issued notification under Section 6 of the L.A. Act bearing No. LAC (F)-NTLA/2004/190. The Land Acquisition Collector passed an award bearing No.7 of the year 2006-2007 dated 14.01.2006.
5. The appellants challenged the said notification in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana vide Civil Writ Petition No.3823 of 2008. The High Court vide its judgment and order dated 13.03.2008 dismissed the writ petition by assigning untenable reasons. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants have filed this appeal.
6. The learned counsel for the appellants placed strong reliance on the application filed under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 which has come into force w.e.f. 01.01.2014, the said provision is extracted hereunder:-
“24(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the LA Act, where an Award under the said Section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
Provided that whether an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of land holdings has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries specified in the notifications for acquisition under Section 4 of the said land acquisition and shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act.”
7. It is contended that in the instant case, the appellants are fulfilling the requirements of Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 as the physical possession of the land involved in these proceedings has not been taken till date and no compensation is paid to the appellants though the award has been made on 14.01.2006. Therefore, the said provision under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 squarely applies to the case of the appellants and the land acquisition proceedings in so far as the appellants land is concerned be deemed to have elapsed.
8. Further, the learned counsel for the appellants placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in the cases of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 183 Bharat Kumar v. State of Haryana & Another, (2014) 6 SCC 586 Bimla Devi & Others v. State of Haryana & Others, (2014) 6 SCC 5
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.