- Supreme Court has in many cases has held that Section 24 (2) providing for lapsing of acquisition under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in case award made prior to five years of commencement of Act on failure to take possession or make payment of compensation of Right to Fare Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 is not attracted in case of acquisition of land under National Highways Act, 1956. You will be entitled to interest from the date of acquisition of notification, that is the only relief or you. Under Section 3J application of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is expressly excluded hence any provisions of Right to Fare Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 are not applicable.
- When award by competent authority is not acceptable, the determination goes to Arbitrator and from thereon to High Court. Civil Court have jurisdiction only to determine apportionment of awarded amount among claimants if any dispute arises. You can very much seek after accepting the award under protest enhancement of award granted by Arbitrator but the forum is High Court.
Land acquisition
I have a piece of land on NH 1 close to Jalanadhar in Distt. Kapurthala. A Part of the the land was acquired by Ministry of Transpost under the National Highway Act 1956 in 2010 for the purpose of building a truck stand without any knowledge to me. However it came to my knowledge only this year when I got information of being carried out by the same authorities for anther portion of the land for building a ring road .My question is in two parts as under. 1. Since the land acquisition which was done in 2010 has not been implemented so far in terms of taking of physical possession nor the payment of award money have been received by me till date .Even the mutation of the property still stands in my name as on date. No project has been undertaken by the Authorities on this property till date. Under ese circumstances, should not not this acquisisition lapse under the provision of section 24(2) of the The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 or under any other provisions of law. If yes then what procedure should I follow to get the land restored to me. 2. Having already filed objections to the notification under section 3 D of the new acquisition proceedings with the Distt. Revenue Officer and hoping that a judicious valuation and compensation shall not be forthcoming, I shall like to know whether it shall be appropriate for me to approach the Arbitrator for seeking higher valuation and compensation or it shall be appropriate to approach the appropriate court of law and whether or not I shall be legally eligible or not to file an appeal after accepting compensation awarded by the Arbitrator under protest or otherwise and what shall be the limitation period for such an appeal.
Asked 5 years ago in Civil Law
First answer received in 30 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
10 Answers
1. You can file a writ petition before high court seeking to retrieve your property.
2. You can prefer an appeal against the decision and seek to return your property through high court.
As per as your concern you have to file WRIT petition in the Hon'ble High Court.
- WRIT OF MANDAMUS
- WRIT OF PROHIBITION
By filing these 2 Writ petitions the Hon'ble High Court will look into your matter & will pass an order accordingly.
If have all the required valid documents and permits then by filing Writ at the Hon'ble High Court you do have strong case.
In 2014, a three-judge bench headed by then Chief Justice RM Lodha in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirmal Solanki held that if the compensation is not deposited in the bank accounts of the land owners meant that they have not received the payment. The judgment elucidated that even if the payment was kept in government treasury, it would not mean that the payment has been made. Therefore, it ruled that compensation must be either paid to landowners or deposited in the court for lands awarded under the 1894 Act. Thus, just a meagre deposit of the amount in a government treasury was not at all sufficient and led to a lapse of the land acquisition process under the 2013 Act
2) land owners who had refused to accept compensation or who sought reference for higher compensation, cannot claim that the acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
3) in your case since possession of land remains with you and compensation has not been paid nor deposited in govt treasury land acquisition proceedings would lapse
4) you can file writ petition in HC that acquisition of your land be set aside
In event of section 24(2) of the 2013 Act not being of help in the event of Hon'ble Suoreme Court's judgments to the contrary,can any other grounds be explored to get the relief in my favor particularly non utilization of land by the Authorities for the intended purpose even after 10 years of acquisition e.g suspension of the project which most likely has been done by the Authority as the same interferes with the alignment of the new ring road project.Please advise any additional plea also which can help even if the suspension has not taken place on record.
Asked 5 years ago
Go through the citation your will get your answer (2011) 12 SCC 69(Union of India V. Kushala Shetty). Paragraph No.28 of the said decision reads as under:- “28. Here, it will be apposite to mention that N.H.A.I. is a professionally managed statutory body having expertise in the filed of development and maintenance of national highways. The projects involving construction of new highways and widening and development of infrastructure in the country, are entrusted to experts in the filed of highways. It comprises of persons having vast knowledge and expertise in the field of highway development and maintenance. N.H.A.I. prepares and implements projects relating to development and maintenance of national highways after thorough study by experts in different fields. Detailed project reports are prepared keeping in view the relative factors including intensity of heavy vehicular traffic and larger public interest. The Courts are not at all equipped to decide upon the viability and feasibility of the particular project and whether the particular alignment would subserve the larger public interest. In such matters, the scope of judicial review is very limited. The Court can nullify the acquisition of land and, in the rarest of rare cases, the particular project, if it is found to be ex facie contrary to the mandate of law or tainted due to mala fides. In the case in hand, neither has any violation of mandate of the 1956 Act been established nor has the charge of malice in fact been proved. Therefore, the order under challenge cannot be sustained.”
There is judgment from Kerala High Court which says that, “The compensatory benefits due to the petitioners shall be computed and granted in terms of the Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of the new Act, 2013 as amended by the Amendment Ordinance etc.”
There is judgment from Kerala High Court which says that, “The compensatory benefits due to the petitioners shall be computed and granted in terms of the Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of the new Act, 2013 as amended by the Amendment Ordinance etc.”
There are number of SC judgments on issue
it is well settled law that where possession of land has not been taken nor compensation paid or deposited land acquisition proceedings would lapse
A five-judge bench was constituted in IDA-II, to answer these issues and to resolve the conflict arising from the judgments in the Pune Municipal Corporation Case (3 judge bench)[2] and the Indore Development Authority Case (3 judge bench, hereinafter “IDA-I”)[3]. The Apex Court, in Pune Municipal Corporation Case, had held that where landowners had refused to accept the compensation, the money had to be deposited in Court. The deposit of compensation in the treasury after this refusal would not be regarded as payment of compensation thereby leading to a lapse of proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act. The correctness of this view was doubted by IDA-I.
The 5-judge Bench overruled the Pune Municipal Corporation Case and upheld IDA-I and concluded that the Government’s obligation to pay compensation was complete when it tendered or offered the compensation to the landowners. It was also held that the Government was not obligated to deposit the compensation in Court on the landowner’s refusal to accept the same. It was further held that the deposit of the compensation in the treasury instead of the Court caused no prejudice to the landowner and that the consequence of non-deposit in Court was limited to a higher rate of interest being payable as per Section 34 of the 1894 Act. The Court also held that the non-deposit of compensation in Court did not result in a lapse of the acquisition proceedings. Furthermore, it was held that the proceedings did not lapse if the compensation tendered was refused by the landowner or reference was sought for a higher compensation.
Section 24(2) states that land acquisition proceedings initiated under the LA Act will lapse if the State has yet to take physical possession of the land “or” failed to pay compensation to the landowners.
one of the primary issues pertained to the interpretation of “or” in Section 24(2). The provision states, “where an award [under the LA Act] has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this [2013] 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”.
The provision said that if no award of compensation has been decided in a land acquisition case by January 1, 2014, then the provisions of 2013 Act will apply in determining the compensation for acquisition of land.
The provision also says that if an award has been announced prior to the cut-off date, then the land acquisition proceedings shall continue under the 1894 Act
It said the deemed lapse of land acquisition proceedings under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act takes place where due to inaction of authorities for five years or more prior to commencement of the law, the possession of land has not been taken nor compensation has been paid.
Therefore you may consult an advocate in the local and may prefer an appeal before the high court of your state by filing a writ petition seeking releif and remedy.
Dear Sir/ Ma'am
In reference to the applicability of sec 24 (2) of land Acquisition Act 2013 to the land acquired under National Highway Act in the year 2010. Sir, it will not be applicable, because the condition the section is referring to is for land that has been acquired under land acquisition act, 1894. If Sir may please refer section 3-J of the national Highway Act it states that the provisions of the land acquisition act, 1894 are not applicable to acquisition made under the Highway Act.
As per section 3-D if a declaration in regard to acquisition of your property was passed for which you did not file an objection earlier under section 3-C, but of which no compensation has been given under section 3H, which states that it is a pre-requisite that compensations shall be provided before taking of possession from the owner. Sir, you should file a writ petition asking the court to direct the authority to undertake appropriate procedure and determine the compensation as per the sections of the National highway Act. Since the case relates to property acquired in 2010 there will be issue of limitation.
The determination of compensation if made under the act will be made under section 3-G of the act where in if you are dissatisfied by the amount you can ask for appointment of an arbitrator under Sec 3-G (6). Arbitral award will be final unless it can come under circumstances of setting aside of award under section 34 of Arbitration Act.
Thank you
- As per law, the government cannot acquire any private land without sending a notice to the owner of the land and also without publishing the proposal in the two news papers, if the notice not served upon the owner.
- Further, without deciding the compensation and paying the same, the government department cannot take possession of the land for the specified purposes like construction of road etc.
- As per the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 2007, the payment for acquired land must be made within one year from the date of the declaration, and the Collector can extend this time limit by six months with a penalty of 5% per month, and further if payment has not been made within one year nor has the Collector granted an extension, the land acquisition proceedings shall lapse.
- Further, after the compensation amount is determined, the Collector must ensure that payment occurs within 60 days. Possession of land shall not be taken unless full compensation is paid or tendered to the land owner.
- Further, the land owners whose property has been acquired under urgency shall be compensated an additional 75% of the market value of the land.
- Since, your land has taken without your consent and without paying /deciding the compensation, then you should file a written complaint with the Collector.
- Further, the Collector is bound to resolve the issue 15 days from the receipt of the complaint, and if the Collector fails to act, then you can direct complaint with the authority which has taken the land for road construction.
- Hence you are entitled to get 75% more than the market value of the said land acquired by the government.
Dear Sir/ Ma'am
In reference to the applicability of sec 24 (2) of land Acquisition Act 2013 to the land acquired under National Highway Act in the year 2010. Sir, it will not be applicable, because the condition the section is referring to is for land that has been acquired under land acquisition act, 1894. If Sir may please refer section 3-J of the national Highway Act it states that the provisions of the land acquisition act, 1894 are not applicable to acquisition made under the Highway Act.
As per section 3-D if a declaration in regard to acquisition of your property was passed for which you did not file an objection earlier under section 3-C, but of which no compensation has been given under section 3H, which states that it is a pre-requisite that compensations shall be provided before taking of possession from the owner. Sir, you should file a writ petition asking the court to direct the authority to undertake appropriate procedure and determine the compensation as per the sections of the National highway Act. Since the case relates to property acquired in 2010 there will be issue of limitation.
The determination of compensation if made under the act will be made under section 3-G of the act where in if you are dissatisfied by the amount you can ask for appointment of an arbitrator under Sec 3-G (6). Arbitral award will be final unless it can come under circumstances of setting aside of award under section 34 of Arbitration Act.
Thank you