GOVERNMENT OF NCT DELHI & ORS versus JAI PAL

Citation: [2023] 2 S.C.R. 214 · Decided: 13-03-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
214
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 2 S.C.R.
GOVERNMENT OF NCT DELHI & ORS.
v.
JAI PAL
(Civil Appeal No. 1616 of 2023)
MARCH 13, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND MANOJ MISHRA, JJ.]
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) –
It was specific case on behalf of the appellants-Government of NCT
Delhi that possession of the land was taken – High Court relying
upon Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. v. Harakchand Misrimal Solanki
& ors allowed the writ petition preferred by the respondent/original
writ petitioner – High Court held that the acquisition proceedings
in respect of land in question deemed to have lapsed u/s. 24(2) of
2013 Act on the ground that the compensation has not been paid to
the original petitioner – On appeal, held: The decision in the case
Pune Municipal Corporation has been overruled by the Constitution
Bench in the case of Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and
Ors. – Applying the law laid down in Indore Development Authority
to the facts of the case, as the possession of the land in question
was taken, there shall not be any deemed lapse u/s. 24(2) of Act,
2013 – Order of the High Court is set aside – Appeal allowed.
Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal & Ors.
(2020) 8 SCC 129 : [2020] 3 SCR 1 – followed.
Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. v. Harakchand
Misrimal Solanki & Ors. (2014) 3 SCC 183 – referred
to.
Case Law Reference
[2020] 3 SCR 1
followed
Para 2.1, 3
(2014) 3 SCC 183
referred to
Para 2, 2.1
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1616
of 2023.
[2023] 2 S.C.R. 214
214
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
215
From the Judgment and Order dated 13.02.2017 of the High Court
of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 4776 of 2015.
Ms. Sujeeta Srivastava, Adv. for the Appellants.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition
(C) No. 4776 of 2015 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ
petition and has declared that the acquisition proceedings initiated under
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1894”)
with regard to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section
24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter
referred to as “Act, 2013”), the Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.
have preferred the present appeal.
2. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High
Court, it appears that it was the specific case on behalf of the appellants
herein – original respondents that the possession of the land in question
was taken on 11.07.2008. However, thereafter without going into the
controversy of physical possession, the High Court has allowed the writ
petition and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in
question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013
relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal
Corporation and Anr. Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors.,
(2014) 3 SCC 183 and on the ground that the compensation has not
been paid.
2.1 The decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal
Corporation and Anr. (supra), which has been relied upon by the
High Court, has been overruled by the Constitution Bench of this Court
in the case of Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and
Ors., (2020) 8 SCC 129. In paragraphs 365 and 366, the Constitution
Bench of this Court has observed and held as under:-
“365. Resultantly, the decision rendered in Pune Municipal
Corpn. [Pune Municipal Corpn. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki,
(2014) 3 SCC 183] is hereby overruled and all other decisions in
which Pune Municipal Corpn. [Pune Municipal Corpn. v.
GOVERNMENT OF NCT DELHI & ORS. v. JAI PAL
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
216
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 2 S.C.R.
Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, (2014) 3 SCC 183] has been
followed, are also overruled. The decision in Sree Balaji Nagar
Residential Assn. [Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Assn. v. State
of T.N., (2015) 3 SCC 353] cannot be said to be laying down
good law, is overruled and other decisions following the same are
also overruled. In Indore Development Authority v. Shailendra
[(2018) 3 SCC 412], the aspect with respect to the proviso to
Section 24(2) and whether “or” has to be read as “nor” or as
“and” was not placed for consideration. T

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.