NANAK CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The controversy involved in the matter at hand revolves around the applicability of Sec. 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, 'the Act of 2013') onto the facts of the case wherein the award under Sec. 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was announced on 2/3/2006 i.e. more than five years prior to the commencement of the Act of 2013 on 1/1/2014 and as contended by the petitioners, neither the possession of the land has been taken by the State nor compensation has been paid/deposited till date. In view of said facts, prayer has been made to declare that the acquisition proceedings have lapsed under Sec. 24 (2) of the Act of 2013.

(2.) The interpretation of Sec. 24 (2) of the Act of 2013 had remained under cloud for long until it finally came to be decided by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and others SLP (C) 9036-9038 of 2016, whereby the Apex Court has laid down the guiding principles in order to decide whether in given facts and circumstances, the acquisition proceedings can be declared to have been lapsed in view of deeming fiction provided under Sec. 24 (2) of the Act of 2013. The concluding paragraph 363 of the judgment is reproduced here-in-below:-

(3.) The exposition of the law made by the Apex Court can be summarized in the following manner for more clarity on the principles laid down by the Constitution Bench:-