Refusal to accept offered compensation precludes a claim for deemed lapse under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.

JUDGMENT :

M.R. Shah, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 31.08.2015 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Civil Application No.9740/2012 by which the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat has allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question 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 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2013”) as also the judgment and order dated 01.04.2016 passed by the High Court of Gujarat in Misc. Civil Application (For Review) No.3036 of 2015 in Special Civil Application No.9740/2012, the State of Gujarat and others have preferred the present appeals.

2. The facts leading to the present appeals in nutshell are as under:

2.1 That, the respondent herein – original writ petitioner was the owner of the land bearing Survey No.287 admeasuring 2 Hectare 37 Are 75 Sq. Mtrs. of village Tarsava, Taluka Vaghodia, District Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as “land in question”). A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1894”) came to be issued on 11.04.1991 to acquire the land in question alongwith adjacent agricultural lands for the purpose of resettlement of Narmada Project oustees. That, thereafter, notification under Section 6 of the Act, 1894 was issued on 06.02.1992. The respondent herein – original land owner – original writ petitioner entered into an agreement and a consent award was passed on 11.06.1993. As per the agreement and the consent award, initially 90% of the amount of compensation was required to be paid to the land owners and 10% amount was required to be paid thereafter. However, it appears that the respondent – land owner had second thought about the consent and on 13.02.1995, he wrote to the Assistant Commissioner, Sardar Sarovar Rehabilitation Agency that the compensation may not be paid and the land in question be released from acquisition. On such application, the Assistant Commissioner passed an order dated 07.03.1995, in which, he recorded that the order was passed for payment of 90% of the compensation, however, the land owner did not accept such compensation. Thereafter, even the order of payment of remaining 10% of compensation was also passed however, the land owner – respondent herein did not accept such compensation and that he has now applied for cancellation of acquisition itself on the ground that due to family disagreements, he is not prepared to sell the land. Thereafter, nothing further happened till 2009 and it appears that the land owner/s continued to be in possession and continued to cultivate the agricultural lands.

2.2 That, on 21.01.2009, the Assistant Commissioner, Sardar Sarovar Rehabilitation Agency cancelled the order dated 07.03.1995 by observing that the acquisition of the land in question has been completed and the land has been vested in Sardar Sarovar Rehabilitation Agency and on basis of that affected persons were allotted also and therefore, as per the legal provision, once an order is passed, it is mandatory to make the payment of compensation. Therefore, the Assistant Commissioner, Sardar Sarovar Rehabilitation Agency cancelled the earlier order dated 07.03.1995 and restored the order for 90% and 10% amount of compensation as per the earlier orders dated 05.05.1993 and 09.02.1994 (for payment of 90% and 10% of the amount of compensation respectively). Pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 21.01.2009 of the Assistant Commissioner, the Special Land Acquisition Officer vide communication/letter dated 05.04.2010 conveyed to the respondent herein – original land owner that his case for payment of compensation is fixed on 16.04.2010 in the office of Talati-cum-Mantri, Tarsava and therefore, he shall remain present and receive compensation. That, thereafter the responden