Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1360 OF 2023
(@ SLP (C) NO. 4000 OF 2023)
(@ DIARY NO. 25773 OF 2022)
Delhi Development Authority …Appellant(s)
Versus
Amit Jain & Ors. …Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ
Petition (C) No. 5061 of 2016, by which, the High Court has
allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the
acquisition of suit land measuring 3 bighas and 18 biswas in
Khasra Nos. 10/20/2/1 (2-00) and 21/1 (1-18) and 17/1 (1-9) and
land measuring 1 bigha and 9 biswas in Khasra No. 17/1/1 (2-01)
vide award No. 04/2008-09 dated 31.10.2008 is deemed to have
lapsed by virtue of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by R
Natarajan
Date: 2023.02.24
16:49:50 IST
Reason:
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to
1
as “Act, 2013”), the Delhi Development Authority has preferred
the present appeal.
2. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High
Court and from the counter affidavit filed by the Govt. of Delhi
through LAC before the High Court, it appears that it was the
specific case on behalf of the LAC that the physical possession of
the property/land bearing Khasra Nos. 17/1/1 min (1-18),
10/20/2/1 (2-0), 21/1 (1-18) was duly taken over by the
Government on 29.01.2010. However, remaining 3 biswa land
comprised in Khasra No. 17/1/1 was not taken over due to built-
up. Despite the above and thereafter following the earlier
decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal
Corporation and Anr. Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and
Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 183 , on the ground that the compensation
with respect to the lands in question is not paid/tendered to the
land owners, the High Court has allowed the writ petition and has
declared that the entire acquisition with respect to the land
measuring 3 bighas and 18 biswas in Khasra Nos. 10/20/2/1 (2-
00) and 21/1 (1-18) and 17/1 (1-9) and land measuring 1 bigha
and 9 biswas in Khasra No. 17/1/1 (2-01) is deemed to have
lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.
2
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the original writ
petitioners disputed the actual taking over of possession and
submitted that the possession was taken over by drawing
proceedings. However, as observed and held by this Court in the
case of Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and
Ors., (2020) 8 SCC 129 taking over the physical possession by
drawing the punchnama/possession proceedings can be said to
be sufficient compliance. Therefore, except the remaining 3
biswa land comprised in Khasra No. 17/1/1 which was not taken
over due to built-up, the possession of the other lands in question
were taken by the Government on 29.01.2010. Under the
circumstances, the acquisition with respect to the entire lands in
question could not have been declared as deemed lapse under
Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.
4. In the case of Indore Development Authority (supra) in
paragraph 366, the Constitution Bench of this Court has
observed and 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.
3
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” or
as “and”. The deemed lapse of land acquisition
proceedings under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act takes
place where due to inaction of authorities for five years or
more prior to commencement of the said Act, the
possession of land has not been taken nor compensation
has been paid. In other words, in case possession has
been taken, compensation has not been paid then there is
no lapse. Similarly, if compensation has been paid,
possession has not been taken then there is no lapse.
366.4. The expression “paid” in the main part of
Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act does not include a deposit of
compensation in court. The consequence of non-deposit is
provided in the proviso to Section 24(2) in case it has not
been deposited with respect to majority of landholdings
then all beneficiaries (landowners) as on the date of
notification for land acquisition under Section 4 of the 1894
Act shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with
the provisions of the 2013 Act. In case the obligation under
Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has not been
fulfilled, interest under Section 34 of the said Act can be
granted. Non-deposit of compensation (in court) does not
result in the lapse of land acquisition proceedings. In case
of non-deposit with respect to the majority of holdings for
five years or more, compensation under the 2013 Act has
to be paid to the “landowners” as on the date of notification
for land acquisition under Section 4 of the 1894 Act.
366.5. In case a person has been tendered the
compensation as provided under Section 31(1) of the 1894
Act, it is not open to him to claim that acquisition has
lapsed under Section 24(2) due to non-payment or non-
deposit of compensation in court. The obligation to pay is
complete by tendering the amount under Section 31(1).
4
The landowners who had refused to accept compensation
or who sought reference for higher compensation, cannot
claim that the acquisition proceedings had lapsed under
Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
366.6. The proviso to Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act
is to be treated as part of Section 24(2), not part of Section
24(1)(b).
366.7. The mode of taking possession under the
1894 Act and as contemplated under Section 24(2) is by
drawing of inquest report/memorandum. Once award has
been passed on taking possession under Section 16 of the
1894 Act, the land vests in State there is no divesting
provided under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, as once
possession has been taken there is no lapse under Section
24(2).
366.8. The provisions of Section 24(2) providing for a
deemed lapse of proceedings are applicable in case
authorities have failed due to their inaction to take
possession and pay compensation for five years or more
before the 2013 Act came into force, in a proceeding for
land acquisition pending with the authority concerned as on
1-1-2014. The period of subsistence of interim orders
passed by court has to be excluded in the computation of
five years.
366.9. Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act does not give
rise to new cause of action to question the legality of
concluded proceedings of land acquisition. Section 24
applies to a proceeding pending on the date of
enforcement of the 2013 Act i.e. 1-1-2014. It does not
revive stale and time-barred claims and does not reopen
concluded proceedings nor allow landowners to question
the legality of mode of taking possession to reopen
proceedings or mode of deposit of compensation in the
treasury instead of court to invalidate acquisition.”
5
5. Applying the law laid down by this Court to the facts of the case
on hand and considering the fact that except the 3 biswa land
comprised in Khasra No. 17/1/1 which was not taken due to built-
up, the possession of the other lands in question was taken over
by the Government on 29.01.2010, there shall be no deemed
lapse with respect to the entire acquisition of the lands in
question under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013. Under the
circumstances, the impugned judgment and order passed by the
High Court is unsustainable and the same deserves to be
quashed and set aside and is accordingly quashed and set aside.
Present appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
………………………………….J.
[M.R. SHAH]
NEW DELHI; ………………………………….J.
FEBRUARY 24, 2023. [C.T. RAVIKUMAR]
6