Ocular Evidence Prevails Over Medical Findings: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Despite Negative Semen Report & Police Lapses High Court Cannot Pass Inconsistent Orders: Supreme Court Quashes Demolition Order Passed Despite Earlier Restraint In CMDA Regularisation Dispute Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Open University Degrees Obtained Prior To 2017 Cut-Off Must Be A Polluter Before Being Held Absolutely Liable: Supreme Court Sets Aside NGT Order Against Art Of Living Over Yamuna Event, Orders ₹5 Cr Refund Father Cannot Be Deprived Of Minor's Custody Unless Proved Unfit: Allahabad High Court Hands Over 4-Yr-Old Child To Father, Sets Aside Trial Court Order Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Integral To Personal Liberty': Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail As 24 Witnesses Remain Unexamined No Specific Chemical Opinion That Seized Substance Was Ganja: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Under Section 2(iii)(b) NDPS Act Mere Pendency Of Criminal Cases Simplicitor No Ground For Externment': Karnataka High Court Quashes Raichur SDM Order Order VI Rule 16 CPC | Defendants Enjoy Greater Latitude In Altering Defence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Explains Doctrinal Leeway Under CPC Boarding Running Train Not Self-Inflicted Injury: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Denying Compensation Possession Of One Co-Sharer Is Possession Of All: J&K&L High Court Cannot Invoke Article 226 For Registering FIR Or Restoring Water Supply: Kerala High Court Natural Guardian's Sale Of Minor's Property Without Court Nod Is Voidable, Extinguishes If Not Challenged Within 3 Years Of Majority: Madras High Court Orissa High Court Rejects Cancer-Survivor Husband's Plea To Transfer Maintenance Case Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Defect In Served Copy Of Affidavit Not Fatal: Supreme Court Restores Election Petition Challenging Lok Sabha Poll Result, Clarifies Law On Form-25 Attestation

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order, Land Acquisition Proceedings Deemed Not Lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has quashed a decision by the High Court of Delhi, declaring the acquisition proceedings as lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act, 2013). The apex court, in its ruling, stated that the High Court's interpretation was erroneous, as it relied on a previous decision that had been overruled by a Constitution Bench.

The Court, comprising Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, observed, "The decision rendered in Pune Municipal Corporation is hereby overruled and all other decisions in which Pune Municipal Corporation has been followed are also overruled." The Court clarified that the provisions of Section 24(2) are applicable only when authorities fail to take possession and pay compensation for five years or more before the 2013 Act came into force. The Court emphasized that non-deposit of compensation in court does not result in the lapse of land acquisition proceedings.

The case pertained to the acquisition of lands in the revenue estate of village Wazirabad, with the Land Acquisition Collector, New Delhi, as the appellant and Jai Prakash Tyagi and others as respondents. The High Court had allowed a writ petition challenging the acquisition proceedings, deeming them to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013. The Court's decision was primarily based on the now-overruled judgment in the Pune Municipal Corporation case.

By setting aside the High Court's order, the Supreme Court has upheld the validity of the acquisition proceedings. However, the Court emphasized that if the original landowners or interested parties have not been paid compensation, they should be provided compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court ordered that their claims be considered on their own merits.

Date of Decision: February 24, 2023

Land Acquisition Collector vs Jai Prakash Tyagi & Ors.                                      

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/24-Feb-2023-LAC-vs-Jai-Prakash-Land.pdf"]

Latest Legal News