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

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 77793

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Alka Sarin, Ramesh Chander Dimri, JJ
MUKHTIAR SINGH & ORS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS – Respondent
CWP-26942-2016 (O&M)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Adarsh Jain, Amandeep Kaur, Ashanpreet Kaur
For the Respondents: Saurabh Mago

Land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if the authorities have either taken possession of the land or paid/deposited the compensation, as established by the Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority.

Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition - Lapse of Proceedings - Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act - Possession and Compensation - Acquisition proceedings do not lapse if possession of the land has been taken or compensation has been paid/deposited, regardless of whether the landowner actually received the payment. (Para 8)

(B) Statutory Interpretation - Section 24(2) - Use of the word "or" - The term "or" between possession and compensation is to be read as "nor" or "and", meaning lapse occurs only when both possession is not taken and compensation is not paid due to inaction of authorities. (Para 6)

Issues: Whether the land acquisition proceedings lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Table of Content
1. background of land acquisition proceedings and the procedural history of the remand from the supreme court. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. legal standards for the lapse of land acquisition under section 24(2) of the 2013 act as per the indore development authority case. (Para 5 , 6)
3. application of the 'possession or compensation' rule to the facts of the case to determine no lapse occurred. (Para 7 , 8)
4. withdrawal of the writ petition by the petitioners following the application of settled law. (Para 9 , 10)

ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for declaring the acquisition proceedings to have 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 ‘Act of 2013’).

2. Briefly the facts relevant to the present lis are that on 14.04.1974 a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 1894’) was issued. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act of 1894 was issued on 10.02.1976. The award was passed on 21.10.1976. Thereafter, possession was taken vide rapat roznamcha No.76 dated 21.10.1976.

3. Initially, the present writ petition was allowed vide order dated 27.11.2017. Aggrieved by the same the respondents herein filed an appeal before the Supreme Court. The said Civil Appeal along with the other connected Civil Appeals as also the case titled as State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Aalamgir & Ors. [(2025) 6 SCC 397], being the lead case, was allowed and the matter was remanded back to this Court for reconsidering the issues in view of the Constitution Bench judgment in the case of Indore Development Authority vs. ManoharLal & Ors. [(2020) 8 SCC 129 = 2020 (4) RCR (Civil) 668]

4. As per the written statement dated 16.08.2017 filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2, in Clause D and E, it has been stated as under :

“(D) Status of payment of compensation

That as per record, total amount of compensation of awarded land measuring 15.38 acres of village Sihi was Rs.251331/ out of which an amount of Rs.244373/- has been disbursed to the land owners, which is 97.23%. The balance amount of Rs.6,958/- in respect of which the landowners did not come forward to receive the payment, is lying deposited in the Land Acquisition Collector's common account. As far as the petitioners are concerned, it is submitted that the petitioners are recorded as Gair moursi over the land in question and the petitioners have not received the payment amounting to Rs.12306/ including the payment of land, house and trees and plants. The payment of land is amounting to Rs.6958 plus Payment of house amounting to Rs-5048/- plus payment of trees and plants amounting to Rs 300/- (6958+5048+300=12306).

(E) Status of Possession:

That as per record, the award of the acquired land in question was announced on 21.10.1976 vide award no.4 and the possession of the said land was taken and handed over to HUDA on 21.10.1976 vide rapat no.76.”

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the records.

6. Their Lordships in the case of Indore Development Authority (supra) held as under :

“366. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we answer the questions as under:

366.1. Under the provisions of Section 24(1)(a) in case the award is not made as on 1-1-2014, the date of commencement of the 2013 Act, there is no lapse of proceedings. Compensation has to be determined under the provisions of the 2013 Act.

366.2. In case the award has been passed within the window period of five years excluding the period covered by an interim order of the court, then proceedings shall continue as provided under Section 24(1)(b) of the 2013 Act under the 1894 Act as if it has not been repealed.

366.3. The word “or” used in Section 24(2) between possession and compensation has to be read as “nor”

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 Back to top