05 May 2016
Supreme Court
Download

ALIGARH DEVT.AUTH. Vs MEGH SINGH .

Bench: KURIAN JOSEPH,ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
Case number: C.A. No.-004821-004821 / 2016
Diary number: 2436 / 2011
Advocates: KAMLENDRA MISHRA Vs


1

Page 1

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.4821 OF 2016

(Arising out of SLP ( C) No. 4282 of 2011) ALIGARH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT                                   

                               VERSUS MEGH SINGH & ORS.  RESPONDENTS         

J U D G M E N T KURIAN,J.

1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant- Aligarh Development Authority took steps  for acquisition of land belonging to the respondent No.1 as per  Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition  Act, 1894 (For short `1894 Act') on 09.08.2004. Simultaneously  emergency clause was also invoked under the provisions of Section  17 followed by Section 6 declaration dated 03.08.2005. According  to the appellant possession of the land  was taken and part of  the compensation was deposited with the Special Land Acquisition  Officer.

3. The respondent No.1 challenged the acquisition on various  grounds and the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad by the  impugned Judgment dated 21.10.2010 allowed the writ petition and  quashed the Notification dated 09.08.2004 and the declaration  dated  03.08.2005.   Among  other  reasons,  the  main  reason  for  taking such a view is that after invoking emergency clause, no  award  was passed even after the expiry of four years.  Thus

2

Page 2

aggrieved,  the  Requisitioning  Authority  -Aligarh  Development  Authority is before this Court.  When the matter was pending  before  this  Court,  the  land  owner  non-applicant  filed  I.A.No.3/2015 contending that respondent No.1 is entitled to a  declaration that acquisition proceedings have lapsed in view of  the operation of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and  Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement  Act, 2013 (For short `2013 Act'), since neither compensation has  been paid to the owner nor possession has been taken by the Land  Acquisition Collector.

4. The appellant-Authority has filed reply to the affidavit  stating that the compensation has been deposited with the Land  Acquisition Collector.  As far as the possession is concerned, it  is stated in the affidavit that the land has already been taken  in possession and a `full-fledged and complete residential colony  has been developed'.

5. It is however an admitted position that no Award either  under the 1894 Act or under the 2013 Act has been passed in  respect of the land of respondent No.1.  Section 24 of the 2013  Act  reads as follows:

“24. Land acquisition process under Act No.1 of 1894 shall  be  deemed  to  have  lapsed  in  certain  cases.-  (1)  Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case  of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land  Acquisition Act,1894 (1 of 1894),- a)  Where  no  award  under  section  11 of  the  said  Land  Acquisition Act has been made, then, all provisions of this  Act  relating  to  the  determination  of  compensation  shall

3

Page 3

apply;  or b) Where an award under said section 11 has been made, then  such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the  said Land Acquisition Act, as if the said Act has not been  repealed. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),  in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the  Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894),, where an award  under the said section 11 has been made five years or more  prior  to  the  commencement  of  this  Act  but  the  physical  possession  of  the  land  has  not  been  taken  or  the  compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall  be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if  it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land  acquisition  afresh  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this Act: Provided that where an award has been made and compensation  in  respect  of  a  majority  of  land  holding  has  not  been  deposited in the account of the beneficiaries, then, all  beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition  under section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be  entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions  of this Act.”  

6. Section  24  of  the  2013  Act  envisages  mainly  two  situations;  i)  where  the  land  acquisition  proceedings  had  already  been  initiated  under  the  1894  Act  but  no  award  was  passed till the date the new Act came into force. (ii) where the  Award  has  been  passed  but  neither  the  owner  has  been  dispossessed nor has he been paid the compensation.  Under the  first,  where  the  award  had  not  been  passed,  the  acquisition  proceedings could continue; but the compensation will have to be  determined  under  the  scheme  of  2013  Act.   Under  the  second  category, there is a statutory lapse of the proceedings. There  is also an incidental third situation, where award under the  1894 Act had already been passed prior to coming into force of  the 2013 Act, but payment is yet to be made and possession is  yet to be taken.  In that case, the further proceedings after

4

Page 4

the award could continue under the old Act of 1894;  but if  either payment or possession has not taken effect in five years  prior to the 2013 Act, then proceedings will lapse.

7. In the case before us, since admittedly the award has not  been  passed,  there  arises  no  question  of  lapse.   The  land  acquisition proceedings would continue but with the rider that  the award will have to be passed and compensation determined  under the provisions of 2013 Act.

8. In that view of the matter, it is not necessary to go  into various other aspects.  Having regard to the factual matrix  of the residential colony having been set up, which fact is not  controverted also, it cannot be said that there was an urgency  for the acquisition.  Therefore, the approach made by the High  Court is not correct.  However, the stand of the Authority that  it  had  deposited  80%  of  the  compensation  with  the  land  acquisition officers and hence it was for the owner to collect  the money, cannot be appreciated.  That is a matter between the  Requisitioning  Authority  and  the  Acquisitioning  Authority.  There is no question of `come and get' the compensation while  compulsorily acquiring the land; the approach required under law  is `go and give'.  In this case, no award has been passed and  the land value has not been given to the owner. The impugned  order is hence set aside.  The appellant and the Acquisitioning  Authority are directed to complete the acquisition proceedings  by passing an award under the provisions of the 2013 Act.  This  shall be done within a period of six months and needless also to

5

Page 5

say that the entire compensation due to respondent No.1 would be  calculated in terms of the 2013 Act and the same shall either be  deposited with the Land Acquisition Collector or disbursed to  the respondent No.1 within one month thereafter.

9. The appeal is disposed of as above.  No costs.      ................J.

 [KURIAN JOSEPH]        

 ....................J.             [ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]

  NEW DELHI;   MAY 05, 2016