“Punjab and Haryana High Court: Physical Possession a Must for Land Acquisition, Discrimination Claims Dismissed”
In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasized the necessity of physical possession for land acquisition, thereby dismissing claims of discrimination in a recent judgment. The case, which challenged a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, followed by a Section 6 declaration, had raised critical questions about the interpretation of the law.
The judgment, delivered by a bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on September 11, 2023, clarified the legal position on land acquisition and the vesting of land in the state.
The Court held that actual physical possession is a prerequisite for the vesting of land with the state. This interpretation aligns with the Supreme Court’s recent decision in “Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and others,” which overruled the earlier ruling in Prahlad Singh’s case.
The case involved a challenge to a notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, followed by a Section 6 declaration. The Land Acquisition Authority had not taken physical possession of the land, leading to claims of discrimination based on the release of lands with prior construction. Review applications had previously been dismissed by the Court.
In its observation, the Punjab and Haryana High Court stated, “Land vests with the State upon recording of Rapat Roznamacha. Discrimination claims are not applicable in cases where there is no prior construction.”
Furthermore, the Court rejected the violation of the National Capital Region Planning Board Act No. 2 of 1985, emphasizing that the decision was based on established legal principles.
This judgment sets a precedent in land acquisition matters, clarifying the importance of actual physical possession in such cases and providing guidance for future disputes. The Court’s decision reaffirms the significance of adherence to statutory procedures in land acquisition matters.
Representing the petitioners, Mr. M.L. Sharma, Advocate, argued the case, while Mr. Ankur Mittal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, with Mr. Saurabh Mago, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, represented the respondents. The judgment from the Punjab and Haryana High Court brings clarity to a contentious legal issue and is expected to have far-reaching implications for land acquisition cases across the region.
Date of decision : September 11, 2023
Pawan Singh and another Vs State of Haryana and others
