GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI versus SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA & ORS.

Citation: [2023] 1 S.C.R. 427 · Decided: 10-02-2023 · 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
427
427
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
v.
SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 352 of 2023)
FEBRUARY 10, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Land Acquisition – Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act, 2013 – s.24(2) – Lapse under – Land acquisition proceedings
– Challenge to – Writ proceedings – Relying upon the decision in
the case of Pune Municipal Corporation on the ground that
compensation with respect to the land in question was not paid, the
High Court allowed the writ petition and declared that acquisition
in respect of the land in question is deemed to have lapsed u/s.24(2)
– Decision in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation has however
been overruled by Constitution Bench in the case of Indore
Development Authority – Accordingly, for purpose of lapsing the
acquisition u/s.24(2), the twin conditions namely, not taking the
possession and not paying the compensation have to be satisfied
and if one of the conditions is not satisfied there shall not be any
lapse of the acquisition – Once possession of the land in question
was taken over on 12.03.1981 then applying the law laid down in
the case of Indore Development Authority the acquisition of the land
in question is not deemed to have lapsed u/s.24(2) – Impugned
judgment passed by the High Court is unsustainable.
Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal & Ors.
(2020) 8 SCC 129 : [2020] 3 SCR 1 – followed.
Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. v. Harakch and
Misrimal Solanki & Ors (2014) 3 SCC 183 – held
overruled.
Case Law Reference
[2020] 3 SCR 1
followed
Para 2
(2014) 3 SCC 183
held overruled
Para 2
   [2023] 1 S.C.R. 427
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
428
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 1 S.C.R.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 352 of
2023.
From the Judgment and Order dated 30.05.2016 of the High Court
of Delhi at New Delhi in WP (C) No.1399 of 2014.
Chandan Kumar, Chandra Prakash, Vivek Singh, C. P. Rajwar,
Ms. Somi Sharma, Advs. for the Appellant.
Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv., Jasbir Singh Malik, Ram Chandra
Madam, Varun Punia, Nitin Mishra, Ishaan Sharma, Advs. for the
Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and order dated 30.05.2016 passed by the High Court of
Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 1399 of 2014, by which,
the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has declared
that the land acquisition proceedings in respect of 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 has preferred the present appeal.
2. It is true that there is a huge delay in preferring the appeal
which is vehemently opposed by Shri Neeraj Kishan Kaul, learned
Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the contesting respondent(s)
– original writ petitioner, however, taking into consideration the other
similar orders passed by different benches in condoning such delay
in preferring the appeal challenging the order(s) passed by the very
High Court declaring that the acquisition is lapsed under Section 24(2)
of the Act, 2013 and taking into consideration the fact that while
passing the impugned judgment and order the High Court has relied
upon and/or followed the earlier decision of this Court in the case of
Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. Vs. Harakchand
Misirimal Solanki and Ors., reported in (2014) 3 SCC 183
which has been overruled by the Constitution Bench of this Court in
the case of Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and
Ors., reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129 and the observations made
in paragraph 365 which is reproduced hereinbelow, in which it is
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
429
observed that all the decisions in which the decision in the case of
Pune Municipal Corporation (supra) have been relied upon stand
overruled, we condone the delay and consider the appeal on merits.
3. Having gone through the impugned judgment and order
passed by the High Court and even as observed by the High Court in
the impugned judgment and order, as such the possession of the land
in question was taken over as far as back on 12.03.1981. However,
thereafter relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pune
Municipal Corporation (supra) on the ground that the compensation
with respect to the land in questi

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