GYANENDER SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioners seek the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2013 Act") which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioners urged that possession of the subject lands have not been taken nor has the compensation been paid to them. They also state that the awards made in respect of the subject lands were made more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act. Consequently, it is contended that all the ingredients necessary for invoking the provisions of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act has been satisfied.

(2.) The learned counsel for the respondents contend that possession of the subject lands were taken on 05.07.2013 and 17.07.2013 and this fact was informed to this court in W.P.(C) No. 7057/2005 (Court On Its Own Motion). Insofar as compensation is concerned, it was contended on behalf of the respondents that the amount of compensation was deposited in this court in CM Main Nos. 1403/2013 and 1411/2013 on 30.12.2013. It was contended that as the District Courts were closed for the vacation, the same could not be deposited there and, therefore, the cheques representing the amount of compensation were deposited in this court in the above CM Main Nos. 1403/2013 and 1411/2013. Therefore, according to the respondents, the compensation had been paid to the petitioners prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act. Consequently, it was submitted that the acquisition had been completed under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as possession had been taken and compensation had also been paid.

(3.) It has been made clear by the Supreme Court decisions in Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors, 2014 3 SCC 183; Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and Ors, 2014 6 SCC 564; and Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors: Civil Appeal No. 8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014 that in the context of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, where an award has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act and where either of the two contingencies is satisfied, that is, (i) physical possession of the land has not been taken, or (ii) compensation has not been paid, the acquisition proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed. In the present case, as the question of physical possession is disputed, we are not entering into that arena of controversy. Insofar as the question of compensation is concerned, we are of the view that the manner in which the respondents state that compensation has been paid is not in accord with the law as settled by the Supreme Court in Pune Municipal Corporation . But before we examine the position as stated in Pune Municipal Corporation it would be relevant to refer to the order passed by a Vacation Judge of this court on 30.12.2013 in, inter alia, CM Main Nos. 1403/2013 and 1411/2013. The same reads as under:-