Land Acquisition Dispute: Supreme Court Remands Case to High Court for Fresh Consideration

The Supreme Court of India recently delivered a significant judgment concerning land acquisition disputes under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The case revolved around whether certain land acquisitions initiated by the State of Haryana should be deemed to have lapsed due to non-payment of compensation and non-possession by the authorities. The Supreme Court overturned the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s decision and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.

Background of the Case

The dispute arose when landowners in Haryana challenged the acquisition of their lands, arguing that the acquisition process had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. The key contention was that the compensation had not been paid or deposited with the relevant authority and that possession of the land remained with the landowners, despite the passage of several years.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled in favor of the landowners, holding that the acquisition was deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) since compensation had not been paid or deposited with the civil court as required under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Arguments Presented

State of Haryana’s Arguments

The State of Haryana, represented by senior counsel, made the following submissions:

The land acquisition process was legally completed, and possession had been taken through administrative processes such as the drawing of Rapat/Rooznamcha.
Since the possession had already been taken, the land had vested with the government, making the question of lapse under Section 24(2) irrelevant.
The High Court failed to consider the Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal, where the Supreme Court ruled that acquisition would not lapse if possession had been taken through lawful means.

Landowners’ Arguments

The respondents (landowners) countered with the following points:

They continued to have physical possession of the lands, contradicting the state’s claim that possession had been taken.
The government had failed to deposit compensation in the reference court as per Section 31 of the 1894 Act, thereby fulfilling the conditions for lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Some landowners presented documents obtained through the RTI Act, indicating that realignment of roads was being considered, which implied that the acquired land was no longer needed for the intended public purpose.

Supreme Court’s Judgment

The Supreme Court, after reviewing the arguments and the High Court’s decision, found that the matter required reconsideration in light of the precedent set in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal. The Court ruled:

“Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, more particularly, paragraph 21 of the impugned order, and as it is the case on behalf of the State of Haryana that the possession of the lands in question was taken over by preparing Rapat/Rooznamcha, the matters are required to be remanded to the High Court.”
“In view of the decision of this Court in Indore Development Authority (supra), there shall not be any deemed lapse of acquisition with respect to the lands acquired.”
“The High Court is directed to decide the writ petitions afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits, taking into consideration the law laid down in Indore Development Authority.”

Directions Issued by the Supreme Court

In light of its findings, the Supreme Court issued the following directives:

The High Court must reconsider the matter by applying the principles laid down in Indore Development Authority.
The landowners were granted the liberty to file representations for de-acquisition under Section 101-A of the 2013 Act, applicable to the State of Haryana.
The High Court should dispose of the remanded petitions within nine months from the receipt of the Supreme Court’s order.
The State Government retains the discretion to consider de-acquisition requests independently of the judicial proceedings.

Impact of the Judgment

This ruling clarifies that mere non-payment of compensation does not automatically lead to the lapse of acquisition if possession has been taken by the government. It reinforces the principles established in Indore Development Authority, ensuring uniform application of the law across similar cases.

For landowners, the judgment provides an opportunity to present additional evidence before the High Court and seek relief under Section 101-A of the 2013 Act, where applicable. Meanwhile, the ruling strengthens the position of state authorities in defending acquisitions where possession has been legally transferred.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision to remand the case to the High Court ensures that the legal principles governing land acquisition are correctly applied. By balancing the rights of landowners with the government’s need to carry out public projects, the judgment underscores the importance of a fair and transparent approach to land acquisition disputes. Moving forward, the case will be closely watched as the High Court re-examines the matter in light of the Supreme Court’s directives.

Petitioner Name: State of Haryana & Ors..
Respondent Name: Hira Singh.
Judgment By: Justice M.R. Shah, Justice C.T. Ravikumar.
Place Of Incident: Haryana, India.
Judgment Date: 02-05-2023.

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

Download Judgment: state-of-haryana-&-o-vs-hira-singh-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-02-05-2023.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Property Disputes
See all petitions in Specific Performance
See all petitions in Damages and Compensation
See all petitions in Landlord-Tenant Disputes
See all petitions in Contract Disputes
See all petitions in Judgment by Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
See all petitions in Judgment by C.T. Ravikumar
See all petitions in partially allowed
See all petitions in Remanded
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments May 2023
See all petitions in 2023 judgments

See all posts in Civil Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category