STATE OF HARYANA Vs. HIRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order dtd. 27/10/2016 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP No. 26213/2014 and other allied writ petitions, by which, the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the said writ petitions and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the lands in question is deemed to have lapsed under Sec. 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 2013 "), the State of Haryana and others have preferred the present appeals.

(2.) From the impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court, it appears that the Division Bench of the High Court has declared that the acquisition with respect to the lands of respondents - original writ petitioners shall be deemed to have lapsed under Sec. 24(2) of the Act, 2013 by observing in paragraph 21 as under: ­

(3.) Shri K.T.S. Tulsi and Shri Gopal Shankranarayanan, learned Senior Advocates appearing on behalf of original writ petitioners in SLP Nos. 20857/2022 and 28803/2018, respectively, in the cases of Hira Singh and Pritam Kumar Goel, have submitted that in fact the respective land owners are in actual and physical possession of the lands in question. It is submitted that therefore and when the compensation has not been paid/tendered as per Sec. 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as rightly observed and held by the High Court, there shall be deemed lapse of acquisition as the conditions mentioned in Sec. 24(2) of the Act, 2013 are satisfied.