Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Procedure of Acquisition under the Act of 2013 - Main points and insights
Initiation of Land Acquisition:
Acquisition proceedings can be initiated under either the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 or the 2013 Act, depending on the date of initiation. If proceedings under the 1894 Act are pending on or after 01.01.2014, the 2013 Act provisions, especially those related to compensation, apply. If no proceedings were initiated under the 1894 Act before the 2013 Act came into force, acquisition must follow the 2013 Act's procedures ["State of West Bengal VS Pranab Kumar Mukherjee - Calcutta"].
Transition from Old to New Act:
When acquisition proceedings are initiated under the 1894 Act prior to 01.01.2014, the proceedings continue under the 1894 Act, except for the determination of compensation, which is governed by the 2013 Act ["State of West Bengal VS Pranab Kumar Mukherjee - Calcutta"]. If proceedings are pending on the date of enforcement, the 2013 Act's provisions, especially Section 24(2), may cause the proceedings to lapse if compensation or award is not finalized within the prescribed period ["Natural Collections (L. L. P. ) VS State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh"].
Procedure under the 2013 Act:
The Act emphasizes a transparent, participative process, including mandatory steps like issuing notifications under Section 11, holding public hearings, and following due process of law. The notification under Section 11 must be issued after proper survey and publication, and the process must adhere strictly to the procedural safeguards to avoid invalidation ["Girish Ratilal (Halani) Thakkar for Himself And As Poa Of Rakeshkumar Natvarlal Thakkar VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat"] ["Thirumani Dharmaraj VS State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Chennai - Madras"].
Critical Procedural Steps:
Award and Compensation: The Collector passes an award, and compensation is determined as per the provisions of the 2013 Act, which mandates fair market value and participation of affected persons ["K.J.James vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Its Secretary, Public Works Department - Kerala"] ["Bhimavarapu Nagi Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh"].
Lapse of Proceedings:
Acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act that do not culminate in an award before 01.01.2014 are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. Such proceedings cannot be revived unless fresh acquisition is initiated following the 2013 Act's procedure ["K.J. James vs State of Kerala - Kerala"] ["Mushtaq Ahmad Paul VS UT of J&K - Jammu and Kashmir"].
Violations and Invalid Procedures:
Any deviation from the prescribed procedure, such as improper notices, failure to follow the notification process, or ignoring the rights of landowners, renders the acquisition illegal. Strict compliance with the procedural mandates of the 2013 Act is essential for lawful acquisition ["Mohd. Mir Laiq Ali, S/o. Mir Iqbal Ali vs State of Telangana, Department of Municipal Administration and Urban Development, reptd by its Principal Secretary, Hyderabad - Telangana"] ["Girish Ratilal (Halani) Thakkar for Himself And As Poa Of Rakeshkumar Natvarlal Thakkar VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat"].
Special Exemptions and Amendments:
Analysis and Conclusion
The procedure of land acquisition under the 2013 Act involves a sequence of mandatory steps designed to ensure transparency, participation, and fair compensation. Proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act before 01.01.2014 continue under the old law, with the 2013 Act applicable only to the determination of compensation and certain procedural aspects if proceedings are pending. If acquisition proceedings are not completed within the stipulated period, they lapse under Section 24(2). Any procedural lapses or violations of the prescribed process can invalidate the acquisition, emphasizing the need for strict adherence to the law. In cases where the law is not followed, affected landowners are entitled to challenge the validity of the acquisition ["Natural Collections (L. L. P. ) VS State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh"] ["State of West Bengal VS Pranab Kumar Mukherjee - Calcutta"].
References:
Land acquisition in India is a critical process governed by the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act, 2013). This legislation replaced the outdated Land Acquisition Act, 1894, introducing greater transparency, fair compensation, and rehabilitation measures. But what exactly is the procedure for acquisition under this Act? Understanding this is essential for landowners, developers, and government bodies to navigate potential disputes and ensure compliance.
In this comprehensive guide, we break down the procedure of acquisition under the Act of 2013, drawing from statutory provisions and judicial precedents. Whether you're facing a notification or challenging proceedings, these insights can help clarify your position.
The RFCTLARR Act, 2013, emphasizes public purpose, fair compensation, and social impact assessments. It applies to acquisitions by the government for infrastructure, urbanization, and industrial projects. Key changes include mandatory consent from affected families in certain cases and time-bound processes to prevent indefinite delays. Failure to follow these steps can lead to proceedings lapsing, as seen in various court rulings. Motibhai Ambabhai Patel VS State Of Gujarat - Gujarat (2023)
The acquisition process is methodical, starting from initiation and culminating in possession. While some references in case law bridge the 1894 and 2013 Acts during transition, the core under the 2013 Act involves the following stages:
Initiation of Land Acquisition The process typically begins with a preliminary notification signaling intent to acquire land. Under the transitional framework, this echoes Section 4 of the 1894 Act but aligns with Section 11 of the 2013 Act for new proceedings. This step is recognized as preliminary, and once issued, it sets the proceedings in motion. Motibhai Ambabhai Patel VS State Of Gujarat - Gujarat (2023)Nathubha Bhikhubha Parmar VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat (2015)
Publication of Notification The notification must be published in official gazettes, newspapers, and locally to inform affected parties. Importantly, once issued, subsequent purchasers cannot challenge the proceedings, emphasizing the finality of this step. Motibhai Ambabhai Patel VS State Of Gujarat - Gujarat (2023) This protects the process from post-notification transfers.
Inquiry and Hearing Post-notification, objections are invited, and a formal inquiry or public hearing is conducted to assess necessity, public purpose, and impacts. This step ensures transparency and allows affected persons to voice concerns. Nathubha Bhikhubha Parmar VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat (2015)
Declaration of Acquisition If approved, a declaration under Section 19 (2013 Act) or akin to Section 6 (1894) is issued and published. This formalizes the intent to acquire specific lands. Nathubha Bhikhubha Parmar VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat (2015)
Award and Compensation Determination The Land Acquisition Collector passes an award under Section 23 (2013 Act), detailing compensation based on market value, solatium, and rehabilitation benefits. The award must be passed under the extant law, i.e., the 2013 Act, if applicable. Nathubha Bhikhubha Parmar VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat (2015)
Payment of Compensation Compensation is tendered to landowners or deposited. Payment is a critical step, as non-payment can lead to the acquisition lapsing under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. Tender under provisions like Section 31(1) of the 1894 Act (transitional) completes this obligation. Motibhai Ambabhai Patel VS State Of Gujarat - Gujarat (2023)
Taking Possession After award and payment, physical possession is taken, marking completion. Once possession is taken, proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2). Motibhai Ambabhai Patel VS State Of Gujarat - Gujarat (2023)
Summary of Process: Notification → Inquiry → Declaration → Award → Payment → Possession. Motibhai Ambabhai Patel VS State Of Gujarat - Gujarat (2023)
Section 24(2) is pivotal for ongoing 1894 Act proceedings post-2013. If possession is taken but compensation not paid/deposited for five years or more, the acquisition lapses. However, if possession hasn't been taken, lapse occurs even without the five-year clause. Courts have clarified: Acquisition proceedings lapse if compensation is not paid within the prescribed period, or if certain procedural requirements are not fulfilled. Motibhai Ambabhai Patel VS State Of Gujarat - Gujarat (2023)
In one case, where no acquisition was initiated under the old West Bengal Act and possession taken without award, petitioners were entitled to fresh proceedings under the 2013 Act. The court directed compensation under RFCTLARR, noting the state illegally without following any procedure of acquisition took away the land. Sk. Saokat Ali VS State of West Bengal - 2023 Supreme(Cal) 788
Conversely, Section 24(1)(a) applies only to 1894 initiations, not state-specific acts like the 1990 State Land Acquisition Act. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) VS Nisar Ahmed Ganai - 2022 Supreme(SC) 1035
Purchasers after the Section 4 (preliminary) notification have limited recourse. Purchase of land after notification u/s 4 is void ab initio. No benefit can be claimed on basis of a void transaction. Shiv Kumar VS Union of India - 2019 Supreme(SC) 1143 They cannot claim lapse under Section 24(2) or rehabilitation, as they aren't affected families under Section 3(c). Unauthorized re-entry post-possession doesn't confer rights. Shiv Kumar VS Union of India - 2019 Supreme(SC) 1143
Acquisitions must serve a defined public purpose under Section 2(1) and 3(za). In a notable case involving 'Veda Nilayam,' the court quashed acquisition for procedural irregularities, holding it served no public purpose under the 2013 Act. All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam Rep. , by C. Ve Shanmugam, Villupuram District Secretary VS J. Deepak - 2022 Supreme(Mad) 452
Railway projects under special acts follow distinct procedures, but inquiries into irregularities (e.g., diversions) are permissible if rule of law demands. Bali Nagwanshi, Son of Shri Buter Nagwanshi VS State of Chhattisgarh - 2022 Supreme(Chh) 199
For consents, only lands of consenting parties may be acquired in some projects. Anemoni Ramesh vs The State of Telangana - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 64988
The procedure under the 2013 Act balances development needs with landowner rights through structured steps and safeguards like lapse provisions. Ensure compliance with all procedural steps, especially timely payment of compensation. Motibhai Ambabhai Patel VS State Of Gujarat - Gujarat (2023) Judicial trends reinforce finality post-notification while punishing procedural lapses.
Key Takeaways:- Process completes with possession and payment.- Section 24(2) triggers lapse on non-payment.- Subsequent purchasers have no standing.- Public purpose is mandatory.
This article provides general information based on legal precedents and is not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
#LandAcquisition2013 #RFCTLARRAct #LandLawIndia
, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short “the Act 2013”). ... From perusal of Section 6 of General Clauses Act, 1897 as well as Section 114 of the Act, 2013, it is quite vivid that once the Act, 1894 has been repealed and no action for acquisition of land has been initiated as per the Act, 1894, then any action for acquisition of the land has to be taken as per ... Section 24(2) of t....
Act where the acquisition proceedings have been initiated prior to 01.01.2014, all provisions under the 2013 Act relating to the determination of compensation alone would apply to such acquisition proceedings. ... Act or in the manner provided under the 2013 Act. ... Deepak Agarwal (supra) that proceedings will continue following the procedure laid down in the 1894 Act excepting that the provisions in the #HL_START....
This larger aspect has to be kept in view in order to ensure that the acquisition under the 2013 Act is expedited. ... ”) and if so, whether the appellants are obligated to commence the acquisition process afresh in accordance with provisions of the 2013 Act. ... While the said litigation was pending with ad interim protection, the 2013 Act came into force w.e.f. 01.01.2014, which opened a floodgate of fresh challenges on the ground of acqu....
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land acquisition further submits that the respondent authorities have followed the procedure as prescribed under the Act 30 of 2013 and further submits that those who have given consent for the acquisition, only their lands are acquired for establishment of Industrial ... This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:- “to declare the action of the Respondents that, without following proper procedure as per The Right to Fair Compensat....
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land acquisition further submits that the respondent authorities have followed the procedure as prescribed under the Act 30 of 2013 and further submits that those who have given consent for the acquisition, only their lands are acquired for establishment of Industrial ... This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:- “to declare the action of the Respondents that, without following proper procedure as per The Right to Fair Compensat....
, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, for acquisition of the entire land owned by the petitioner therein for road widening and pay compensation to her, while observing as hereunder:- “ Section 146 of the GHMC ACT contemplates acquisition of immovable property ... , of respondent No.3, without following the procedure prescribed under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity ‘the L.A.Act’) read with A.P. ... He further submitted that petition....
Section 7 of the 2013 Act, no such decision was taken by the District Collector. It was contended therefore that the notification issued under Section 11 of the 2013 Act had to be seen as invalid. ... The preamble to the 2013 Act indicates that it was enacted to replace the earlier expropriatory legislation by providing for a humane, participative, informed and transparent process for land acquisition.
Thus, this Court has hesitation to hold that no acquisition proceeding was practically initiated under Act 2 of 1948. But the State Government illegally without following any procedure of acquisition took away the land of the petitioners. ... Where acquisition proceeding was initiated under the Act 2 of 1948 and no award is passed till date, the provisions of 2013 Act will not be applicable. ... It is also submitted for the state respondent that sub ....
Section 7 of the 2013 Act, no such decision was taken by the District Collector. It was contended therefore that the notification issued under Section 11 of the 2013 Act had to be seen as invalid. ... dealt with the procedure to be followed in the exercise of that power. ... The preamble to the 2013 Act indicates that it was enacted to replace the earlier expropriatory legislation by providing for a humane, participative, informed and transparent process for land #HL_....
and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short “2013 Act”), for the reason that it would amount to a situation that the land although stands utilised (deemed to have been acquired), however, without any procedure in law being followed by the respondents, attracting a situation clearly falling under the provisions ... of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. ... The Petitio....
The learned Judge has also erred in holding that in view of the repeal of LA Act by coming into force of 2013 Act, the corresponding provisions of 2013 Act would regulate acquisition proceedings under the BDA Act and that this would include determination of compensation in accordance with 2013 Act. It is hereby clarified that since LA Act has been incorporated into the BDA Act so far as they are applicable, the provisions of 15 2013
The Collector has no authority to inquire into the matter under the provisions of the Act, 1989. The Additional Collector was notified as Competent Authority. The whole procedure of acquisition has taken place under the provisions of the Act, 1989. The notification dated 21.8.2007 issued under Section 20A of the Act, 1989, can neither be challenged in any Court nor can it be examined by a Criminal Court.
9.1. Sections 126 and 127 of the said Act are set out hereunder: “126. Hence, Section 126 and 127 of the said Act are relevant provisions for the purpose of determining the case in hand. That apart it is seen that in the present case the acquisition process for acquisition of the said lands was about to commence under the provisions of the Act of 1894, but due to the enactment of the Act of 2013, the acquisition was carried out and completed under the provisions of the Act of 2013. Hence, it will be relevant to refer to the some of the provisions of the Act of 2013 also.
As noted above, learned Senior Advocate for the appellants has addressed the Court at length about the 'public purpose' being achieved through the acquisition in question vis-avis the arguments by learned Senior Advocates for the original writ petitioners that the acquisition in question was more for 'political purpose' and no 'public purpose' as defined under the Act of 2013 was served. Having held as above, let it now be examined, whether the acquisition in question could be said to be for any 'public purpose' as defined under section 3 (za) read with sub-section (1) of Section 2....
The decision in Manav Dharam Trust (supra) has been mainly relied upon by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the purchasers/petitioners in which a Division Bench opined that subsequent purchasers are affected by the acquisition. It has further opined that since declaration is sought, the challenge is not to the acquisition proceedings. Because of the operation of section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, the ratio of the various cases decided by this Court under the Act of 1894, has no application to such situations. Therefore, they are entitled to seek a declaration of the lapse of a....
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
