SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari, JJ.
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Nisar Ahmed Ganai & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 6778- 6780, 6781-6783 of 2022
Decided On : 12-10-2022
Land Acquisition - Applicability of Act, 2013 - Section 24(1)(a) - State Land Acquisition Act, 1990 - Act, 2013
Fact of the Case:
The High Court directed the appellants to determine and pay compensation under the Act, 2013 for acquired lands, which were sought to be acquired under the State Land Acquisition Act, 1990. The appellants challenged this direction.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that Section 24(1)(a) of the Act, 2013, which applies to land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, does not apply to lands acquired under the State Act of 1990. The Court also noted that the pendency of writ petitions and the order of status quo prevented the declaration of the award, and the landowners were not entitled to enhanced compensation under the Act, 2013.
Issues: Applicability of Section 24(1)(a) of the Act, 2013 to lands acquired under the State Act of 1990, and entitlement to enhanced compensation due to non-declaration of the award.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 24(1)(a) of the Act, 2013 applies only to land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and not to acquisitions initiated under any other Central or State enactment. The pendency of writ petitions and the order of status quo prevented the declaration of the award, and the landowners were not entitled to enhanced compensation under the Act, 2013.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, the High Court's judgment directing the payment of compensation under the Act, 2013 was quashed and set aside, and the writ petitions were remitted back to the High Court to decide on other grounds for quashing the land acquisition proceedings.
JUDGMENT :
M.R. Shah, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order dated 06.10.2021 passed by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, at Jammu in respective writ petitions preferred by the private respondents herein – original petitioners whereby the appellants herein – original respondents have been directed to determine the compensation of the acquired lands in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 2013”), the appellants herein – original respondents have preferred present appeals.
2. The facts leading to the present appeals in a nutshell are as under :
2.1 That, the lands in question were sought to be acquired under the provisions of the State Land Acquisition Act, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as “State Act of 1990”). The notification under Section 4 of the State Act of 1990 was issued on 15.11.2016. The lands in question were sought to be acquired for the appellants – beneficiary. That thereafter declaration under Section 6 of the State Act of 1990 was issued on 12.11.2018. The land owners – original petitioners filed the respective petitions before the High Court challenging the proceedings initiated under the J&K Land Acquisition Act SVT 1990 with the following prayers:
A. CERTIORARI; so as to quash the proceedings initiated by respondents u/s 4,6,9 & 9A and Section 17 of J & K Land Acquisition Act, SVT 1990 for the acquisition of land for relocation of petroleum Depots from Channi Himmat near Railway Station to Villages Pargalta and Khana Chargal, Tehsil and District Jammu.
B. MANDAMUS ; so as to command and direct the respondents to denotify the land sought to be acquired in villages Pargalta and Kanna Chargal, Tehsil and District Jammu for relocation of Petroleum Depots.
C. PROHIBITION; so as to restrain the respondents from taking the possession of land falling under various Khasra numbers of aforesaid villages u/s 17 of J&K Land Acquisition Act.
2.2 That, during the pendency of the writ petitions before the High Court, the State Act of 1990 came to be repealed. When the aforesaid writ petitions came up for hearing before the High Court, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the original writ petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be satisfied, if instead of quashing the land acquisition proceeding, determination of compensation is made in accordance with the provisions of Section 24 of the Act, 2013.
2.3 It was the case on behalf of the original writ petitioners before the High Court that as neither the possession of the lands in question have been taken over nor the award has been declared even under the State Act of 1990, the original writ petitioners shall be entitled to compensation of acquired land in accordance with the provisions of Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013.
2.4 The aforesaid prayer was opposed by the appellants on the ground that as the acquisition proceedings have been initiated under the State Act of 1990, Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013 shall not be applicable at all. It was submitted on behalf of the appellants that in view of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 read with sub-clause (13) of Clause 2 of the Jammu & Kashmir Reorganization (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2019 issued vide S.O. No.3912(E) of 2019 dated 30.10.2019 of the Ministry of Home Affairs (Department of J & K Affairs) the repeal of the Act shall not affect the rights, privileges, obligations or liabilities acquired, accrued or incurred under any law so repealed and that any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued and enforced as if Jammu & Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019 has not been passed. Therefore, it was submitted on behalf of the appellants that award in respect of the acquisition in question has to be made in accordance with the provisions of the State Act of 1990 and Section 24 of the Act,
Section 24(1)(a) of the Act, 2013 applies only to land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and not to acquisitions initiated under any other Central or State enact....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the term 'local authority' under the State Land Acquisition Act and the impact of the repeal of the Act on ongoing acquisitio....
The physical possession of the land and tendering of compensation discharge the state's obligation, and the land essential for public purpose cannot be released from acquisition.
No lapse of proceedings under the Act of 1894 occurs if compensation has been paid and possession of the acquired land has been assumed, even if no award has been made.
Subsequent purchasers of land can only claim compensation based on their vendors' titles and cannot challenge acquisition proceedings initiated under different statutes.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – After acquisition of land and passing of award, land vests in State free from all encumbrances – Vesting of land with State is with possession – Any person reta....
(1) Courts should adjudicate on all issues and give its findings on all issues and not to pronounce judgment only on one of issues.(2) Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – There being delay in pass....
Section 24 of the Right to Compensation Act does not apply to acquisitions initiated under the West Bengal Requisition and Acquisition Act; subsequent purchasers can only claim compensation based on ....
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.