SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Cal) 141

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.
Jibankrishna Mondal (since deceased) Sushanta Mondal & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondent
WPA 28796 of 2008
Decided On : 30-04-2026

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Amit Kumar Pan, Adv. Ms. Tanusri Santra, Adv.

Acquisition proceedings initiated under a prior statute remain valid if a formal award is passed. Subsequent legislation concerning the lapsing of acquisitions does not apply where physical possession was taken and a valid award was declared before the enactment of the newer law.

Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition Act, 1894; Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Sections 24 and 25 - Acquisition proceedings initiated under repealed legislation - Whether proceedings survive after statute lapses - Award passed in 2008 - Held, existence of a valid award renders the acquisition proceeding conclusive and not pending. (Paras 21, 23, 27)

(B) Compensation - Rental compensation; occupational charges - Determination of quantum of compensation involves disputed questions of fact - Courts in writ jurisdiction are not the appropriate forum for factual determination of compensation rates, which require evidence - Parties granted liberty to approach appropriate forum. (Paras 28, 29)

Facts of the case:
The predecessors of the petitioners had agricultural lands requisitioned and possessed by the authorities for a drainage project. An acquisition notice was issued in the mid-1970s. During the pendency of proceedings, the enabling statute was amended and eventually lapsed. After prolonged legal delays, an award was declared in 2008. The petitioners challenged the ongoing proceedings, seeking the return of land or updated compensation, arguing that the proceedings should lapse due to the expiry of the enabling act.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the acquisition process had concluded upon the passing of a valid award. The statutory provisions for lapsing of proceedings upon non-payment or failure to take physical possession were held inapplicable because physical possession was secured years prior and an award was formally declared. The retention of compensation funds by the authorities during legal proceedings constitutes a bona fide impediment rather than non-compliance.

Issues: Whether acquisition proceedings initiated under a lapsed statute continue to be valid after the declaration of an award and whether such proceedings are subject to the lapsing provisions contained in newer legislation.

Ratio Decidendi: Once a valid award is passed, acquisition proceedings are deemed concluded, and the matter is no longer 'pending' or 'inconclusive'. Provisions of modern land acquisition acts regarding the lapsing of acquisitions do not apply retroactively to cases where possession was taken and an award was declared prior to the enactment of said legislation.

Result: Petition allowed with directions to make payment of compensation within eight weeks.

Table of Content
1. historical timeline of land acquisition proceedings and legislative amendments. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. procedural history and the framing of the limited relief sought. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. assessment of undisputed facts regarding possession and status of compensation. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
4. application of repealed and amended statutory provisions to pending acquisition. (Para 18 , 19)
5. validity of the award and non-applicability of the 2013 act where an award already exists. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)
6. final adjudication of claims and directions for compensation disbursement. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)

Judgment :

Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.

1. The predecessor-in-interest of petitioner nos. 1(a) to 1(g) was the owners of plot nos. 1120 and 1607, measuring an area of about 0.79 and 0.06 acres of land, respectively. Petitioner no. 2 was the owner of plot nos. 1218, 1239 and 6996, measuring an area of about 0.05, 0.20 and 0.41 acres of land respectively, and petitioner no. 3 was the owner of plot nos. 7051, 7043, 1623 and 1207 measuring an area of about 0.35, 0.24, 0.36 and 0.03 acres of land respectively, situated at Mouza – Butia, J.L. No. 33, under Police Station – Budge Budge, District – South 24 Parganas.

2. The aforesaid lands were requisitioned, including other vast areas of land, and possession thereof was taken over on 19th January, 1971, in connection with the Charial Basin Drainage Scheme after initiation of a proceeding under the West Bengal Land (Requisition &Acquisition) Act, 1948 (in short, the said Act, 1948).

3. The land was acquired under Section 4(1a) of the said Act, 1948, upon publication of a Notification being No.7242 L. A. (PW) dated 19th March, 1975, in the Calcutta Gazette and accordingly notices under Section 5(3) of the said Act, 1948, were issued to the land owners.

4. During the pendency of the proceedings initiated by the authority, the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Amendment Act, 1994, came into force and the life of the aforesaid Act, 1948, was extended till 31.03.1997.

5. Subsequently, Section 7A was inserted after Section 7 of the Principal Act by virtue of Section 3 of the amending Act, 1948.

6. The West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948, ultimately lapsed. The Government of West Bengal, Land and Land Reforms Department issued a Notification in Calcutta Gazette on 2.05.1997, notifying that the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1997 would be deemed to have come into force on the 1st day of April, 1997. Section 9 of the Principal Act, namely Act 1 of 1894, was amended by which sub-sections (3A) and (3B) were inserted after section 9(3).

7. The respondent authorities sought to proceed to declare the Award on the basis of the earlier notice issued under Section 4(1a) of the repealed Act of 1948, although the said Act was declared repealed; as such, the writ petitioners have filed this instant writ petition seeking relief, inter alia, as follows: -

a) “a) A Writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to proceed any further on the basis of the notice under Sub-section (1a) of Section-4 of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 being Notification No. 7242 L.A. (PW) dated 19th March 1975 in the Calcutta Gazette on 19th March 1975 in connection with Case No. LA-II/1 of 1968-69;

b) A writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to pay rental compensation as admissible under the law;

c) A writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to return back the possession of the land in question details of which are given in paragraph – 2 in this petition forthwith;

d) A writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to pay the occupational charges on and from 1st April 1995 till the date of handing over back the possession of the land in question;

e) A writ in the nature of Certiorari calling upon the respondent

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top