advocatemmmohan

My photo

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN -  Practicing both IN CIVIL, CRIMINAL AND FAMILY LAWS,Etc.,

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - FOR KNOWLEDGE IN LAW & FOR LEGAL OPINIONS - SHARE THIS

Friday, May 13, 2016

the acquisition proceedings get lapsed.- due to non payment of compensation- a fresh acquisition and a fresh award should be passed = Under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, where an Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act has been passed and in case compensation has not been paid to the land owner or deposited before the Court in terms of the requirements under the 1894 Act, the acquisition proceedings get lapsed. In case compensation has not been paid, the land acquisition proceedings in respect of that acquisition will stand lapsed, as if there is no acquisition. =When a land is compulsorily acquired, it is for the Requisitioning Authority to make the payment and does not require the land owner to come and receive the payment.= In case there is any dispute as to who is to be paid the amount, the same is to be deposited in Court in terms of Section 31 of the 1894 Act. In this case before us, the stand of the Requisitioning Authority, namely, Haryana Development Authority is that the money is ready with them and it is for the land owner to come and receive the payment. This stand is not permissible under the law. It is for the authorities concerned to pay the money and take the land and in case there is any dispute as to whom the money should be paid, then the same has to be deposited in Court. As admittedly no compensation has been paid to the appellants in terms of the above mentioned Award passed in the year 2005, the appellants are entitled to succeed. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The proceedings for acquisition of land of the appellants and covered by the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and leading to the Award referred to above stand set aside as having been lapsed.

                                                                  REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                        CIVIL APPEAL NO.4864 OF 2016
                  (Arising out of SLP (C)No. 22578 of 2008)



VIJAY LATKA & ANR.                           APPELLANTS


                                VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.                      RESPONDENTS


                            J U D G M E N T


      KURIAN, J.


            Leave granted.

   The appellants are aggrieved by the judgment dated 01.05.2008  in   Civil
Writ Petition No. 4118/2006 of the High Court of Punjab  and  Haryana.   The
writ petition was filed  by  the  appellants  challenging  the  Notification
dated 11.11.2002 issued under Section 4 of the Land  Acquisition  Act,  1894
(For short `1894 Act') and the declaration dated 07.11.2003 and Award  dated
31.10.2005.  The High Court dismissed the writ petition on the  sole  ground
that since Award  had  already  been  passed,  the  writ  petition  was  not
maintainable.
       Be that as it may, during the pendency of the writ petition, in  view
of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in  Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement  Act,  2013  (For  short  `2013
Act') appellants have filed an additional  affidavit  stating  therein  that
the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed as  far  as  the  land  of  the
appellants  are  concerned.   Since  according  to   the   appellants,   the
respondent State has  neither  paid  the  compensation  nor  taken  physical
possession of the land, this court directed the  State  to  respond  to  the
affidavit.  Accordingly, an affidavit dated 19th April, 2016 has been  filed
before  this  Court  by  the  Administrator,   Haryana   Urban   Development
Authority.  At paragraph 3 of the affidavit, it is  stated  that  the  award
was made on 31.10.2005 and “that possession of the land was  taken  over  on
as is where is basis by the Land Acquisition Collector on  31.10.2005.....”.
 Whether taking over the possession in  such  a  manner  would  satisfy  the
statutory requirement of taking physical possession  is  a  question  to  be
addressed.

4.          However, since the appellants are otherwise entitled to  succeed
in this case we leave that question open. It is the case of  the  appellants
that no compensation in respect of the acquired land has been paid to  them.
 Learned counsel for the respondents submits  that  whoever  approached  the
Authority, the  compensation  has  been  paid.   The  learned  counsel  also
invited our attention to  paragraph  8  of  the  affidavit  which  reads  as
follows:

            “That as regards the  compensation  amount  for  acquired  land,
office of the Land Acquisition Officer,  Panchkula  has  reported  that  the
compensation has not been obtained by the  petitioners  though  compensation
to the extent of Rs.4,00,93,086/- has already been obtained  by  other  land
owners who came forward to take the compensation.  Therefore, there was  due
offer of compensation and the present case does not fall within the  meaning
of provision contained in Section 31(2) of the Act, 1894.”



5.          Under Section 24(2) of  the  2013  Act,  where  an  Award  under
Section 11 of the 1894 Act has been passed and in case compensation has  not
been paid to the land owner or deposited before the Court in  terms  of  the
requirements  under the 1894 Act, the acquisition  proceedings  get  lapsed.
In case compensation has not been paid, the land acquisition proceedings  in
respect  of  that  acquisition  will  stand  lapsed,  as  if  there  is   no
acquisition.

6.           The  contention  of  the  learned  counsel  appearing  for  the
respondents  is  that  whoever  approached  the  Haryana  Urban  Development
Authority or the competent authority has been paid  compensation  and  since
the  appellants  failed  to  approach  the  quarters   concerned   for   the
compensation, they cannot be granted any relief.  We  find  this  contention
difficult to appreciate.  When a land is compulsorily acquired,  it  is  for
the Requisitioning Authority to make the payment and does  not  require  the
land owner to come and receive the payment.

7.          As and when land is taken over by way of acquisition,  the  land
owner has to be compensated with the amount of compensation duly  determined
under the Act.  In case there is any dispute as to who is  to  be  paid  the
amount, the same is to be deposited in Court in terms of Section 31  of  the
1894 Act.   In  this  case  before  us,  the  stand  of  the  Requisitioning
Authority, namely, Haryana Development  Authority  is   that  the  money  is
ready with them and it is for  the  land  owner  to  come  and  receive  the
payment.  This stand is not permissible  under  the  law.   It  is  for  the
authorities concerned to pay the money and take the land and in  case  there
is any dispute as to whom the money should be paid, then the same has to  be
deposited in Court.

8.          As admittedly no compensation has been paid  to  the  appellants
in terms of  the  above  mentioned  Award  passed  in  the  year  2005,  the
appellants are entitled to succeed.  Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

9.    The proceedings for acquisition of land of the appellants and  covered
by the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land  Acquisition  Act,
1894 and leading to the Award referred to above stand set  aside  as  having
been lapsed.


10.          The  learned  counsel  for  the  Haryana    Urban   Development
Authority submits that the land of the appellants has been acquired for  the
purpose of development scheme and it comes under the Green  Belt.   We  make
it clear that this judgment would not stand in the way of the  HUDA   taking
fresh steps for  requisition  of  the  land  of  the  appellants  under  the
provisions of the 2013 Act.

11.  The appeal is allowed.  No costs.


                                         ................J.
                                    [KURIAN JOSEPH]



                                                      ....................J.
   [ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]
   NEW DELHI;
  MAY 05, 2016

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.