Back
2017 Supreme(SC) 1267
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KURIAN JOSEPH, R. BANUMATHI, JJ.
M/s. Ansal Properties & Infrast. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 10017 of 2017 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 20511 of 2008]
Decided On : 03-08-2017
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Chinmayee Chandra, Mr. Vikas Agarwal, Mr. Vinay Arora, Mr. Sanjay Jain
For the Respondents: Mr. Tushar Mehta, Mr. Anil Grover, Mr. Ajay Bansal, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Mr. Satish Kumar, Mr. Ugra Shankar Prasad
Non-payment of compensation leading to the lapse of land acquisition proceedings under the 2013 Act.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Declaration that acquisition proceedings have lapsed due to non-payment of compensation
Fact of the Case:
The issue pertains to the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondent-State. The compensation has not been paid to the owners.
Finding of the Court:
The Court declared that the acquisition proceedings have lapsed due to non-payment of compensation. The State is directed to initiate fresh proceedings under the 2013 Act within six months.
Issues: The issue of whether the acquisition proceedings have lapsed due to non-payment of compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was influenced by the non-payment of compensation, which led to the declaration that the proceedings have lapsed.
Final Decision: The appeal is disposed of with the direction for the State to initiate fresh proceedings under the 2013 Act within six months.
JUDGMENT :
Kurian, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The issue pertains to the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondent-State. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Court, in view of the introduction of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short, “2013 Act”), the question arose as to whether the acquisition proceedings have lapsed or not.
3. On the admitted position that the compensation has not been paid to the owners, in view of the settled position, this Court has to give a declaration that the proceedings have lapsed. Ordered accordingly.
4. Now that the entire acquired land has been used by the State, the only option available to them is to initiate fresh proceedings under the 2013 Act within six months from today.
5. We make it clear that in case no steps are taken for acquisition under the 2013 Act, the respondent-State shall not lay any claim in respect of the land in dispute.
6. With the above observations and directions, this appeal is disposed of.
No costs.
