Summary
Land in Delhi was notified in 1965, and the award was made in 1981. Possession was handed to the beneficiary department on 23.09.1981. Payment of compensation could not be verified because the record (Naksha Muntazmin) was torn. In 2014 the landowners obtained a High Court declaration of lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, to the extent of their share, on the footing that tender of compensation was unclear. The Supreme Court set it aside. Under Indore Development Authority, both possession and compensation must be lacking for a lapse, and possession had been taken. The complaint of short compensation had also been raised for the first time decades after the award.
Issues
- Whether an acquisition lapses under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act where possession was taken in 1981 but payment of compensation could not be ascertained from the records.
Provisions considered
- Section 24(2), Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013Applying Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal (2020) 8 SCC 129, the twin conditions of not taking possession and not tendering compensation must both be satisfied; failure of either means no lapse. (¶¶ 2.3, 2.4, 2.5)
Held
- The High Court declared lapse without considering that possession had been taken and handed over on 23.09.1981; since one of the twin conditions under Section 24(2) was not satisfied, there could be no lapse. (¶¶ 2.2, 2.4, 2.5)
- The High Court also overlooked that the grievance about non-tender of full compensation was raised for the first time in the 2014 writ petition, long after the award, with nothing on record showing any earlier complaint. (¶¶ 2.1, 2.5)
Result
The Government of NCT of Delhi's appeal (Civil Appeal No. 424 of 2023) allowed and the Delhi High Court judgment dated 18.07.2017 in W.P. (C) No. 5664 of 2014 quashed; the DDA's connected appeal (Civil Appeal No. 423 of 2023) disposed of accordingly; no costs.