Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RITU BAHRI, ARCHANA PURI, JJ.
Rakesh Kumar and Others – Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and Others – Respondents
CWP No. 11217 of 2014
Decided On : 30-09-2021
Land Acquisition - Relocation Policy - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4, 6, 11A - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Relocation policy dated 08.02.2014 - [Land Acquisition] - [Sections 4, 6, 11A] - The court discussed the application of urgency provisions under Section 17, the validity of the acquisition proceedings, and the applicability of the relocation policy. The court held that the acquisition proceedings would not lapse even if the award was passed after the prescribed period under Section 11A, and the relocation policy was not applicable to land acquired by the Railway Authority.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to quash the acquisition notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the Award No. 1 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector. They also sought relief of releasing the residential houses and shops from acquisition and extending the benefit of the relocation policy or compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The land measuring 62 acres and 7 marlas of five villages was acquired for national importance by invoking urgency provisions under Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the acquisition proceedings would not lapse even if the award was passed after the prescribed period under Section 11A. It also held that the relocation policy dated 08.02.2014 was not applicable to land acquired by the Railway Authority. The court dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: The issues involved the validity of the acquisition notifications, the applicability of the relocation policy, and the effect of urgency provisions under Section 17 on the acquisition proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the acquisition proceedings would not lapse even if the award was passed after the prescribed period under Section 11A. It also determined that the relocation policy dated 08.02.2014 was not applicable to land acquired by the Railway Authority.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed by the court.
JUDGMENT :
RITU BAHRI, J.
1. The petitioners are seeking to quash the impugned acquisition/notifications dated 18.08.2009 (Annexure P-11) dated 25.05.2010 (Annexure P-12) issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short Act, 1894) respectively and the Award No. 1 dated 03.12.2013 (Annexure P-13) passed by the Land Acquisition Collector on the ground that the award had not been passed within two years from the date of declaration and by operation of Section 11-A of the above said Act, the entire proceedings of the acquisition have since lapsed.
2. The petitioners have further sought relief of releasing the residential houses and shops from acquisition and to extend the benefit of the relocation of plots as per policy dated 08.02.2014 (Annexure P-15) or in the alternate, to pay compensation under the new Act namely Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short ‘Act 2013’).
3. The petitioners have given details of their residential houses and shops which are situated in villages Jandla and Bhanupali, Tehsil Nangal, District Rup Nagar in Para No. 2 of the writ petition.
4. After issuing notification under Section 4 dated 18.08.2009 of the Act, 1894 (Annexure P-11), a declaration under Section 6 of the Act, 1894 (Annexure P-12) was made on 25.05.2010. By invoking provisions of urgency of Section 17 of the Act, 1894 and without affording opportunity of hearing, the land owners were deprived of their legal and fundamental right to file objection under Section 5-A of the above said Act. The total land measuring 62 acres and 7 marlas of five villages namely Nangli, Bhanupali, Jandla, Daroli and Bhalowal, Tehsil Nangal, District Ropar has been acquired.
5. The grievance of the petitioners is that they are not being extended the benefit of relocation policy dated 08.02.2014 which has been placed on record as Annexure P-15.
6. On 29.05.2014 when notice of motion was issued, demolition of houses was stayed keeping in view that after issuing notification dated 18.08.2009, award was passed on 03.12.2013 i.e. after more than 3 years 7 months.
7. Reply by way of counter affidavit of Surabhi Malik, Sub Divisional Magistrate-cum Land Acquisition Collector, Nangal, District Rupnagar dated 11.11.2014 was filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 3. It is stated therein that petitioners had given their applications for enhancement of compensation under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in the office of respondent No. 3 and the same had been forwarded to the concerned District Judge to adjudicate on the matter of compensation awarded vide award No. 1 dated 03.12.2013 (Annexure R-11 to R-12). The land had been acquired for national importance by invoking urgency provisions under Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act and after taking the possession, the same was handed over to the Railway Authorities on 18.08.2010 by tendering 80% amount of the compensation and all the petitioners except petitioner No. 9 have accepted their compensation and in view of Supreme Court judgment passed in Civil Appeal No. 3604 of 2011 titled as Banda Development Authority, Banda vs. Moti Lal Agarwal and Others, the acquisition proceedings cannot be challenged now. The provisions of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 came into force w.e.f. 01.01.2014. Therefore, the provisions of Act, 2013 are not applicable in the present case as the award was passed in this case on 03.12.2013. The respondents have placed on record Rapat Roznamacha Waqiati No. 553 dated 18.08.2010 (Annexure R-13) of villages Nangali, Bhanupali and Darauli and Rapat Roznamacha Waqiati No. 554 dated 18.08.2010 (Annexure R-14) of villages Jandla and Bhalowal, the possession of which was handed over to the Railway Authorities on 18.08.2010. As per the entries of jamabandi (Annexure R-15) and Rapat Roznamacha Waqiati (Annexure R-14) deta
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the acquisition proceedings would not lapse even if the award was passed after the prescribed period under Section 11A, and the relocation pol....
Compliance with Section 17(3-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is mandatory for absolute vesting of the notified land, and the requirement to pass the award within the time frame contemplated unde....
Once possession is taken and an award is passed, challenges to land acquisition proceedings are not maintainable, and remedies for compensation must be sought through reference proceedings.
Once land is vested in the government after acquisition, it cannot be returned to the original owners, even if not utilized for the intended purpose.
The public purpose of developmental activities outweighs private individual interests in land acquisition cases.
Public purpose acquisition implies compliance with statutory provisions and judicial review focuses on procedural adherence, not disputes over substantive merits of the acquisition.
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....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
