S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.

1. All the petitioners in these writ proceedings, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claim benefit of Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, ‘2013 Act’). The lands in respect of which they claim the declaration are located in village Kilokari.

2. The lands in Karala, were subject to acquisition, by a notification under Section 4, dated 25.08.2005; declaration under Section 6 was issued on 10.07.2006. The award, being No. 03/2008-09 was made on 26.05.2008. According to the respondents possession of the suit lands and other such acquired lands, covered by the notification, was taken over in July. The lands were handed over to the beneficiary department/agency, on 9th February 2007.

3. The petitioners’ claim that the acquisition has lapsed by virtue of the 2013 Act, is premised on their submission that though compensation was received by them or their predecessors in interest (in respect of the suit lands), possession was not taken over in accordance with law. They urge that the lands are still under their cultivation. It is submitted that the payment of compensation to them, or for that matter, any other amount, does not preclude challenge to the acquisition and that the 2013 Act applies inexorably.

4. Learned counsel relies on Section 24 of the said Act, which reads as follows:

“Land acquisition process under Act No.1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases – (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894),—

(a) where no award under section 11 of the said Land Acquisition Act has been made, then, all provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation shall apply; or

(b) where an award under said section 11 has been made, then such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the said Land Acquisition Act, as if the said Act has not been repealed.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894), 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 where 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, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under Section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act.”

5. Delhi Development Authority v. Sukhbir Singh AIR 2016 SC 4275 was relied upon by the petitioners, especially the following analysis with respect to taking over of the possession:

“(a) Section 24(2) begins with a non-obstante clause keeping sub-section (1) out of harm’s way;

(b) For it to apply, land acquisition proceedings should have been initiated under the Land Acquisition Act;

(c) Also, an award under Section 11 should have been made 5 years or more prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act;

(d) Physical possession of the land, if not taken, or compensation, if not paid, are fatal to the land acquisition proceeding that had been initiated under the Land Acquisition Act;

(e) The fatality is pronounced by stating that the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed, and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall, in this game of snakes and ladders, start all over again”

Counsel submitted that two conditions had to be fulfilled for the application of Section 24(2) - the a