Page 1

Non-Reportable  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF  INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 21780  of 2008

The Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and Secretary, Punjab & Ors.                   .... Petitioners  

Versus

Gurkirpal Singh                            .... Respondent With

Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 12921  of 2010

And

Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.4994  of 2011

J U D G M E N T

Dr. B. S. CHAUHAN, J.

The first petition has been filed against the impugned judgment  

and  order  dated  9.5.2008,  passed  by  the  High  Court  of  Punjab  &  

Haryana at Chandigarh in Writ Petition No.10511 of 2007 by which  

the notification dated 23.2.2007 de-notifying the land in exercise of  

the  power  under  Section  48  of  the  Land  Acquisition  Act,  1894

Page 2

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) has been exercised by the State  

and the said order has been quashed.

The  subsequent  two  petitions  have  been  disposed  of  by  the  

High Court of Punjab & Haryana in terms of the judgment and order  

passed by the said High Court in first petition.   

Land  was  notified  under  Section  4  of  the  Act  on  8.9.1994.  

Section  6  declaration  was  made on 13.6.1995 and the  Award was  

made on 7.7.1997.  As the award amount was not paid, the “person  

interested” approached the High Court by filing writ petitions wherein  

directions  were  issued  to  release  the  amount  of  compensation.  

Subsequently,  references  under  Section  18  of  the  Act  were  filed.  

Some of the references were decided  and in the Execution Court an  

objection was filed by the State authorities that the land was no longer  

required  for  the  purpose  it  was  sought  to  be  acquired  for,  i.e.,  

establishment  of  court  complex  as  it  was  to  be  established  at  a  

different place.  Therefore, the execution proceedings were dropped  

and  certain  orders  were  passed.   Subsequently,  State  authorities  

denotified the land so acquired issuing a notification dated 23.2.2007  

under Section 48 of the Act.   

2

Page 3

We have heard the matter  at  length and also summoned the  

learned  Land Acquisition  Collector,  Dasuya  alongwith  the  original  

record.  The record was produced before us.

It is a settled legal proposition that once the possession of the  

land is taken by the State under Section 16 of the Act, land vests in the  

State free from all encumbrances.   The State loses its power to de-

notify the same under Section 48 of the Act.   

In the instant case, the only question arose as to whether the  

possession had been taken or not. The High Court after examining the  

facts/record of the case came to the conclusion that the possession had  

been taken on 10.7.1997.  Mutation had also been made, showing the  

land use as for establishment of court complex, Dasuya.  Entries in  

Rapat Roznamcha dated 10.7.1997 corroborate the same.

We have examined the original record ourselves. There is an  

office  order  issued  by  the  learned  Sub  Divisional  Officer  (Land  

Acquisition Collector), Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur, addressed to the  

Tehsildar, Dasuya, which reads as under:-

3

Page 4

“From

Sub Divisional Officer cum Land Acquisition Collector, Dasuya.

To

The Tehsildar, Dasuya.

Sub:  No.375  LAC/dated  7/7/1997,  Announcement  of  Award  for  Judicial Complex, Dasuya.

In the abovenoted subject, the Award for the acquisition of land  for Judicial Complex has been announced on 7.7.1997 in the presence  of the land owners.  You are requested to take possession of this land  in presence of land owner and representative of the Judicial officers.  The compensation of crops may be assessed, if any or take consent of  the  land owners  for  harvesting  the crop at  their  own level.   After  taking of possession report may be sent to this office alongwith Rapat  Roznamcha within two days.  The matter be treated as most urgent.

Sd/- DA/copy of award. Sub Divisional Officers cum

Land Acquisition Collector Dasuya.

xx xx xx xx

No……../LAC/SDA dated   /7/97 A copy is forwarded to the Addl. Senior Sub Judge, Dasuya for  

information.   No……../LAC/SDA dated  /7/97 A copy is forwarded to the Distt. & Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur  

for information.  

Sd/- Sub Divisional Officers cum Land Acquisition Collector Dasuya.”

4

Page 5

The original record reveal entries of taking over and handing  

over the possession containing the signatures of the officers of  the  

State as well as of the “persons interested” and witnesses which make  

it  evident  that  the actual  physical  possession of  the land had been  

taken on 10.7.1997.

In  view  of  the  above,  there  is  no  room  for  doubt  that  

possession had been taken on 10.7.1997 and in such a fact-situation it  

was not permissible for the State to exercise its power under Section  

48 of the Act.  No fault can be found with the impugned judgment and  

orders

The  petitions  are  devoid  of  merit  and  are  accordingly  

dismissed.

…….…………………………………….J.            (DR. B.S. CHAUHAN)

….……………………………………….J. (V. GOPALA GOWDA)

New Delhi;   August 5, 2013

5