Case Title: Haryana State Industrial And Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. & Ors. v. MR. Deepak Aggarwal & Ors.
Bench: Justices A.M. Khanwilkar, Abhay S. Oka and C.T. Ravikumar
Citation: Arising out of SLP(C)Nos.16631-16632/2018
Sec 24 Land Acquisitions Act 2013 | When Land Acquisition Gets Initiated? Explains Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Thursday stated that the acquisitions initiated for public purposes should go on in a fair and transparent manner with a view to achieve the intent and purport of the 2013 Act.
The bench of Justices A.M. Khanwilkar, Abhay S. Oka and C.T. Ravikumar stated that “all such procedures and formalities shall be continued till the determination of compensation by applying all the provisions for determination of compensation, under the 2013 Act. A contra-construction, in view of the restrictive application of the provisions to such proceedings during its continuance, would make the provisions under Section 24(1)(a) of the 2013 Act unworkable.”
In this case, the issue was regarding the meaning and interpretation of the word “initiated” employed in Section 24(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with reference to land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
The question before the bench was:
When Section 24(1) of the 2013 Act makes it clear with necessary implication that all provisions of the 2013 Act relating to the determination of compensation alone would be applicable to such proceedings initiated under the L.A. Act but, not culminated in an award, how the procedures are to be regulated during the intervening period till the proceedings reach the stage of determination of compensation?
The bench observed that a perusal of Section 24 would reveal that the passing of an Award under Section 11 of the L.A. Act is the key factor in deciding the manner and nature of continuance of the land acquisition proceedings.
Supreme Court after referring to various judgments observed that “There cannot be any uncertainty on that aspect. The procedures to be undertaken and the manner in which they are to be regulated cannot remain uncertain. They are conducted either in the manner provided under the L.A. Act or in the manner provided under the 2013 Act. But then, in view of Section 24(1)(a), the provisions relating to the determination of compensation alone can be applied to such proceedings or in other words, there is only a restricted application of the provisions of the 2013 Act in relation to such proceedings.”
Join LAW TREND WhatsAPP Group for Legal News Updates-Click to Join
The bench stated that for the purposes of subsection (1) of Section 24 of the 2013 Act, the proceedings under the L.A. Act shall be treated as initiated on publication of a notification under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the L.A. Act.
Supreme Court further stated that when Clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 24 of the 2013 Act is applicable, the proceedings shall continue as per the L.A. Act. However, only for the determination of compensation amount, the provisions of the 2013 Act shall be applied.
In view of the above, Supreme Court dismissed the petition.