The mandatory nature of the provision for payment of compensation or deposit of the same in the court under Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the interpretation of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

G.S. SISTANI, J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner. The petitioner seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitioner measuring 1 bigha and 6 biswas out of 16 bighas and 4 biswas (being 27/72 shares in 43 bighas and 4 biswas) falling in Khasra nos. 1269 (4-16), 1272 (4-16), 1273 (4-16), 1284 (4-16), 1285 (4-16), 1286 (4-16), 1287 (4-16) 1288(4-16), 1292 (4-16) having possession of land in Khasra no. 1269 (4-16 ), situated in the revenue estate of village Malikpur Kohi @ Rangpuri, New Delhi-110070(hereinafter referred to as the “subject land”) would stand lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the New Act”).

2. Ms. Marwaha submits that a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was issued on 27th June, 1996. A notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 10.01.1997. Thereafter, an Award no.2/1998-99 was made on 07.01.1999.

3. The learned counsel submits that paper possession was taken with respect to a part of the land. However, the actual physical possession of the entire area continues to remain with the petitioner, besides no compensation has been paid. Learned counsel relies on the para 5 of the counter affidavit filed by the LAC in support of her submission that neither compensation has been paid nor possession has been taken.

4. The learned counsel for the LAC submits that the possession of the land has been taken, however, the compensation has not been paid. He submits that the physical possession could not be taken on account of stay having been granted in various petitions.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. We deem it appropriate to reproduce Para 5 of the counter affidavit, which reflects the stand taken by the LAC, as under:

“5. That as per record the status of the land of the petitioner mention in the writ petition is detail as below:

Khasra No.	Notification u/s 4 of LA Act	Notification u/s 6 of LA Act	Award No.	Date of possession	Details of compensation	Stay in Delhi High Court
1269 (4-16),	F.9(12)/95/L&b/LA/9743 Dated 27/06/96	F.9(12)/95/L&b/LA/1046 Dated 10/01/97	02/98-99 village Rangpuri Dated 07/01/99	Possession not Taken	Not received from requisitioning Department. Hence not paid.	Kh. No. 1269(4-16) stay vide WPC No. 4431/15, 1607/16, 1703/16, 1679/16.
1284 (4-16), 1285 (4-16), 1286 (4-16), 1287 (4-16)	Do	Do	Do	Possession not taken	Not received from requisitioning department. Hence not paid.	Kh. No. 1287 (4-16), 1284 (4-16), 1285(4-16), 1286 (4-16), stay vide WPC No. 4431/15, 1568/16, 1607/16, 1703/16 & 1679/16.
1288 (4-16)	Do	Do	Do	Possession not taken	Not received from requisitioning department. Hence not paid.	Kh. No. 1288 stay vide WPC No. 1609/16, 4431/15, 1607/16, 1568/16, 1679/16.
1292 (4-16)	Do	Do	Do	Possession not taken	Not received from requisitioning department. Hence not paid.	Kh. No. 1292 (4-16) stay vide WPC No. 4431/15, 1607/16, 1703/16, 1679/16, 1568/15, 1607/16 & 1703/16.
1272 (4-16) & 1273 (4-16)	Do	Do	Do	Possession taken on 31/12/13	Do	_

7. A careful reading of para 5 would show the details with regard to issuing notifications, Award number and the endorsement regarding possession not having taken for the reasons stated therein have been reflected. The counter affidavit also shows that the amount of compensation was not tendered as the compensation was not received from the requisitioning department.

8. The case of the petitioner is fully cove