GURNAM SINGH AND ORS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 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. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as " the 1894 Act") in respect of which Award No. 15/87 -88 dated 05.06.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners' land comprised in Khasra Nos. 737/1, 737/2,738/2/2, 788/1 and 788/2 and 790/12/3 (0 -14) measuring 7 bighas and 16 biswas in all in village Chhattarpur, Tehsil Mehraulli shall be deemed to have lapsed.

(2.) THE stand of the respondents is that physical possession of the said land was taken on 01.08.2013. This is disputed by the petitioners, who claim to be in actual physical possession of the subject land.

(3.) IN so far as the question of compensation is concerned, the same has not been paid to the petitioners but according to the respondents, the same has been deposited in the treasury. Therefore, they seek to invoke the second Proviso to Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, which was introduced by virtue of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Ordinance, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Ordinance"). In so far as the applicability of the second Proviso to Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act is concerned, the same cannot be relied upon by the respondents inasmuch as the said Ordinance has been held to be prospective in nature and does not take away vested rights. This has so been held by the Supreme Court in recent decision in M/s Radiance Fincap (P) Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. decided on 12.01.2015 in Civil Appeal No. 4283/2011 wherein the Supreme Court held as under: -