Summary
The Delhi High Court declared acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, relying on Pune Municipal Corporation, although the Government of NCT of Delhi's specific case in its counter affidavit was that possession of the land had been taken on 23 February 2007. The Supreme Court allowed the Government's appeal: Pune Municipal Corporation stands overruled by the Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal, under which deemed lapse requires both that possession was not taken and that compensation was not paid, so the declaration was unsustainable.
Issues
- Whether an acquisition can be declared lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 where the acquiring authority's case was that possession had been taken in 2007.
Provisions considered
- Section 24(2), Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013Following paragraphs 365 and 366 of Indore Development Authority, the word 'or' between possession and compensation is read as 'nor' or 'and'; once possession is taken there is no lapse even if compensation remains unpaid. (¶¶ 3, 4)
Held
- Given the appellants' specific case that possession was taken on 23.02.2007, the High Court's declaration of lapse founded on the overruled decision in Pune Municipal Corporation cannot stand. (¶¶ 2, 3, 4)
Result
Appeal allowed without costs; Delhi High Court judgment dated 31.05.2016 in WP (C) No. 2846 of 2015 quashed and set aside; pending applications disposed of.