The Supreme Court has reiterated that the land acquisition proceedings shall not lapse if the award is not made as on the commencement of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The Bench of Justice MR Shah and Justice MM Sundresh held that the view taken by the High Court is unsustainable and placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors., where it was held –

"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 1-has to be determined under the provisions of the 2013 Act."

In this case, the appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order passed by the Allahabad High Court wherein it was declared that the acquisition with respect to the lands in question had been deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 on the ground that the compensation was not tendered/paid to the original land owners. This order of the High Court had been challenged by the Lucknow Development Authority.

Advocate Shantanu Krishna appeared on behalf of the appellant and Advocates Kabir Dixit and Kumar Dushyant appeared on behalf of the respondents. Senior Advocate R. Basant appeared on behalf of the subsequent purchasers.

It was submitted on behalf of the appellant that the possession of the land in question was already taken by the Special Land Acquisition Officer and was delivered to the Lucknow Development authority and that compensation for the same was deposited in the court of District Judge.

The Apex Court relied upon its decision in the case of the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and Ors., (2020) 8 SCC 129 and observed that "it cannot be said that the land proceedings are deemed to have lapsed. As per the law laid down by this Court to attract Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 twin conditions of not taking possession and not tendering/payment of compensation are required to be satisfied. As per the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid decision if one of the conditions is not satisfied, the acquisition proceedings are not deemed to have been lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013."

The Apex Court further observed that the acquisition with respect to the lands in question was deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 solely on the ground that the compensation was not paid to the land owners, which is unsustainable.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the order passed by the High Court was quashed and set aside.

Cause Title- Lucknow Development Authority v. Mehdi Hasan (Deceased) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Justice MR ShahJustice MM Sundreshland acquisition

Sanjoli N Srivastava