The court held that land acquisition proceedings lapsed as the award was not made within two years, violating statutory provisions and infringing constitutional rights.

JUDGMENT :

ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.

1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. The respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, heard finally.

2. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(A) Issues Before the Court:

3. The present petitioners are legal heirs/representatives of the deceased petitioner no. 1 - Laxman Mahadev Katkar, being the original owner of the land in question which was subject matter of land acquisition for the purpose of Urmodi Project. They have approached this Court in the present proceedings, being aggrieved by an order dated 28 May 2018 (“impugned order” for short) passed by respondent no.4. The primary issue for consideration, is whether the entire land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents qua the lands of the petitioners have lapsed, in terms of Section 11A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (“Land Acquisition Act” for short).

4. The substantive prayers in the petition read thus:-

“(b) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ/Order/Direction in the like nature of Article 226 of the Constitution of India:

(i) To hold and declared that the acquisition proceeding initiated by the Respondent No.3 dated 15.10.1999 the land acquisition award bearing No.S.R. No.32/97 passed in respect of the Petitioners lands i.e. suit properties situated at Palashi, Tal. Maan, Dist. Satara has lapsed in view of the Provisions u/s 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013;

(ii) To hold and/or declared that the impugned Order dated 28.05.2018 in KR./Punarv/Kavi/432/2018 passed by the Respondent No.4 arising out of order dated 31.12.1999 in KR./Punarv/Kavi/Review Aarj/434/1999 passed by the Respondent No.2 arising out of the impugned award dated 15.10.1999 in SR/32/97 initiated by the Respondent No.3 under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 in respect of the suit lands is illegal and bad in law; Amendment carried out as per order dated 21.10.2024;

(iii) To hold and declare that impugned acquisition proceeding in respect of petitioners notified lands Gat No.1763, 1776, 1787 situated at Palashi village Tal. Maan, Dist. Satara has deemed to have lapsed in view of the provisions under section 11-A of Land Acquisition Act 1894. ”

(B) Factual Matrix:

The relevant facts necessary for adjudication of the present proceedings are :-

5. The land acquisition proceedings in the given case, initiated by the respondents include the lands originally owned by the deceased Laxman Katkar – petitioner no. 1, admeasuring 2.79R out of gat no. 1763, 2H.21R out of gat no. 1776 and 0H.40R out of gat no. 1787, situated at Palashi Village Tal. Maan, District – Satara (“The Subject Lands” for short) The petitioners are the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased, Laxman Mahadev Katkar. The petitioners are Agriculturists who wholly depend upon agricultural income, as stated in the Petition.

6. Respondent no.2 being the Competent Authority under the Land Acquisition Act issued a notification dated 1 January 1998 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, notifying lands for acquisition for public purpose being rehabilitation of project affected persons by Urmodi project. Subsequently notification dated 11 June 1999 was issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act declaring acquisition of the larger land including subject land for such public purpose. Respondent no.3 is the Special Land Acquisition Officer who published the land acquisition award dated 15 October 1999. Respondent no.4 is the Sub-Divisional Officer who passed the impugned order dated 28 May 2018 by which