##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/12448/2016 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026

0.22844712253305777

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12448 of 2016

=============================================

NAVNITBHAI SHANTILAL PATEL & ORS.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

=============================================

Appearance:

MR AJ YAGNIK(1372) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,4.1 MR SANJAY UDHWANI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

MR RD DAVE(264) for the Respondent(s) No. 4 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3

=============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL

and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY

Date : 23/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

1. Ms. Divyanshi Singh, learned advocate holding the brief of Mr. A.J. Yagnik, learned advocate for the petitioners would submit that the learned advocate for the petitioners has no instruction as on date, inasmuch as, the petitioners have taken away the brief from the learned advocate. No one has been engaged by the

petitioners so far.

2. The present petition has been filed seeking to declare the land acquisition award dated 23.03.1990 as having been lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short as

the “Act’ 2013”) in the month of July 2016.

Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by BIJOY B. PILLAI(HC00202) on Tue Mar 24 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 00:23:55 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/12448/2016 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026

0.22844712253305777

3. A perusal of the order sheet indicates that on the presentation of the writ petition, notice was issued to the respondents on 04.08.2016, but no interim order has been passed. On 14.02.2019, the petition has been adjourned sine die in view of the pendency of the Special Leave Petition before the Constitutional Bench of the Apex Court pertaining to the subject matter. The Constitution Bench has rendered its decision in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal [(2020) 8 SCC 129] wherein it is held that in the land acquisition proceedings, which has been culminated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short as the “Act’ 1894”) with the making of the award of compensation where paper possession is taken, will not be lapsed in view of Section

24(2) of the Act’ 2013.

4. It is held therein that in cases where the compensation determined under the Land Acquisition award passed under the Act, 1894 has been deposited and paper possession is taken, there is no lapse. In cases where compensation has been paid but possession has not been taken, there is no lapse. Similarly, in the cases where the possession has been taken and the compensation is not paid, there is also no lapse. For the applicability of Section 24(2) of the Act’ 2013, both the requirement of non-payment of compensation and non-delivery of possession have to be fulfilled. In cases where award has been passed under the Act’ 1894, there is no question of the applicability of Section 24(2) of the Act’

2013.

Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by BIJOY B. PILLAI(HC00202) on Tue Mar 24 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 00:23:55 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/12448/2016 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026

0.22844712253305777

5. The provisions of the Section 24(2) Act’ 2013 being transitory in nature, will be applicable only in case the conditions prescribed therein are fulfilled. As in the present case, none of the conditions are fulfilled, as is evident from the averments made in the writ petition, wherein it is admitted that land acquisition proceedings have been culminated with the making of the award dated 23.03.1990 much prior to the enforcement of the Act’ 2013 with effect from 01.01.2014, there is no

question of lapse under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.

6. The assertion in the writ petition that the petitioners have remained in physical possession of the land in question, is neither here nor there