By the Court.—Proceedings for acquisition of a large tract of land situated in Village Nistauli, Pargana Loni, District Ghaziabad were initiated by issuance of a notification under Section 28 of the U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 (The Parishad Act) on 2 August 1997, for a Scheme called Loni Road Bhumi Vikas Evam Grihasth Yojna. This was followed by a declaration made under Section 32 of the Parishad Act on 23 December 2004. The petitioners claim to have purchased the land involved in this petition subsequently by registered sale-deeds executed sometime in 2000/2001/2003/2004/2005. The award was ultimately made on 30 December 2013. This petition has been filed asserting that since neither possession of the land has been taken nor compensation has been paid, the acquisition proceedings will lapse in view of the provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (The 2013 Act). The petitioners have also sought consequential reliefs that the respondents should not take possession of their houses or demolish them and also correct the revenue records in the name of the petitioners by deleting the entries existing in the name of U.P. Awas and Vikas Parishad (The Parishad).

2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the provisions of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act would apply to acquisitions undertaken under the Parishad Act in view of the provisions of the Section 55 of the Parishad Act and, therefore, as neither possession has been taken nor compensation has been paid, the acquisition will lapse and in support of this contention, learned counsel has placed reliance upon certain decisions that relate to acquisitions made under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (The Acquisition Act) and to which reference shall be made at the appropriate stage.

3. Sri Srikant, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Parishad and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents have, however, contended that the provisions of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act would not apply to acquisitions made under the provisions of the Parishad Act and in support of this contention learned counsel have placed reliance upon a Division Bench Judgment of this Court rendered in Atul Sharma and others v. State of U.P. and others, Land Acquisition No. 159 of 2014, decided on 7 February, 2017.

4. We have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

5. It is not in dispute that the proceedings for acquisition of land in the present case were initiated by a notification dated 2 August 1997 that was issued under Section 28 of the Parishad Act. This was followed by a declaration made under Section 32 of the Parishad Act on 23 December 2004. The petitioners were not the owners of the land at the time of issuance of the notification under Section 28 of the Parishad Act as they claim to have purchased the land subsequently between 2000 and 2005. The award was made on 30 December 2013. The petitioners contend that since neither possession has been taken nor compensation has been paid, the acquisition proceedings would lapse in view of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

6. It is, therefore, necessary for the Court to first examine as to whether the provisions of Section 24(2) of 2013 Act would apply to the acquisition made under the Parishad Act. For this, it would be appropriate to refer to the provisions of the 2013 Act and the Parishad Act. Section 24(2) of 2013 Act is reproduced below:

“24(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