Land Acquisition Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes Punjab Government’s Notification

The Supreme Court of India recently ruled in Pawan Kumar Aggarwal v. State of Punjab & Others, addressing the applicability of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act). The judgment examined whether land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, could be quashed due to non-possession by the state.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Pawan Kumar Aggarwal, challenged the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the State of Punjab, arguing that although an award had been passed for his land, he had never been dispossessed. This, he contended, entitled him to protection under Section 24(2) of the LARR Act, 2013.

Under the old Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the government could acquire land for public purposes, but landowners were often left without possession of their land or fair compensation. To address these issues, the LARR Act, 2013, introduced safeguards, including Section 24(2), which states that if compensation has not been paid and possession has not been taken, the acquisition proceedings shall lapse.

The Supreme Court had already ruled in a similar case, Karnail Kaur & Others v. State of Punjab & Others (2015), where landowners retained possession, and the acquisition was quashed. Based on this precedent, the appellant sought the same relief.

Legal Issues Considered by the Supreme Court

• Whether the acquisition of land without dispossession of the owner was valid under the LARR Act.
• Whether the precedent set in Karnail Kaur applied to the appellant’s case.
• Whether the government could continue with the acquisition proceedings despite non-payment of compensation and non-possession.

Arguments by the Appellant (Pawan Kumar Aggarwal)

• The appellant had never been dispossessed of his land, making the acquisition invalid under Section 24(2) of the LARR Act.
• The Supreme Court’s decision in Karnail Kaur set a clear precedent that when possession remains with the owner, acquisition proceedings lapse.
• The government had failed to pay compensation, further justifying the lapse of acquisition.
• Continuing the acquisition despite these facts violated his constitutional rights to property.

Arguments by the Respondents (State of Punjab & Others)

• The acquisition process had been legally completed under the old Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
• The appellant’s claim that possession was not taken was disputed.
• The LARR Act, 2013, should not be applied retrospectively to completed acquisitions.
• Public interest required that land acquisition proceedings be upheld.

Supreme Court’s Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant, quashing the land acquisition notification. The key findings were:

• The appellant had retained possession of the land, making the acquisition void under Section 24(2) of the LARR Act.
• The precedent set in Karnail Kaur was binding, as it dealt with the same acquisition notification.
• The government’s failure to pay compensation further invalidated the acquisition.
• The land acquisition proceedings in respect of the appellant’s property were quashed.

The Court observed:

“In respect of the same acquisition notification, where the possession is still retained by the owner, this Court has quashed the notification. Therefore, this appeal is allowed.”

Implications of the Judgment

• Strengthens landowners’ rights against arbitrary land acquisitions.
• Reinforces the precedent that non-possession by the state renders acquisition invalid under the LARR Act.
• Ensures that landowners who have not received compensation and remain in possession can challenge acquisitions.
• Provides clarity on the retrospective application of Section 24(2) of the LARR Act.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in this case provides relief to landowners affected by incomplete acquisitions under the old Land Acquisition Act. By quashing the notification, the Court reaffirmed its commitment to protecting property rights and ensuring compliance with the LARR Act. This judgment serves as a vital precedent for similar land acquisition disputes across India.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Pawan Kumar Aggarwal vs State of Punjab & Ot Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 11-04-2016-1741854588869.pdf