LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT THROUGH SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. versus MAHIPAL SINGH & ORS

Citation: [2022] 16 S.C.R. 609 · Decided: 02-12-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
610
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 16 S.C.R.
[2022] 16 S.C.R. 610
610
LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT THROUGH
SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
v.
MAHIPAL SINGH & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 8932 of 2022)
DECEMBER 02, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: s.24(2) –
Land Acquisition – Possession of land taken on 03.12.2012and
handed over to DDA – Compensation also sent to Reference Court
on 28.10.2014 – Inspite of this, solely on the ground that the
compensation was not tendered prior to coming into force of the
Act, 2013, High Court declared that the land acquisition with respect
to the land in question was deemed to have lapsed – Held: The view
taken by the High Court is not sustainable in view of the
Constitutional Bench decision of Supreme Court in Indore
Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors. wherein it was held
that in case possession was taken but compensation not paid then
there is no lapse – High Court order set aside.
Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors.
(2020) 8 SCC 129 : [2020] 3 SCR 1 – followed.
Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand
Misirimal Solanki and Ors. (2014) 3 SCC 183 : [2014]
1 SCR 783 – referred to.
Case Law Reference
[2014] 1 SCR 783
referred to
Para 2.1
[2020] 3 SCR 1 
followed
Para 2.2
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8932
of 2022.
From the Judgment and Order dated 31.01.2018 of the High Court
of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 11238 of 2015.
Ms. Sujeeta Srivastava, Adv. for the Appellants.
Krishan Kumar, Nitin Mishra, Advs. for the Respondents.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
611
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. 11238 of 2015 by which the High Court has allowed the
said writ petition and has declared that theland acquisition proceedings
initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to
as “Act, 1894”) with regard to the landin question isdeemed 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 Anr.havepreferred the present appeal.
2. From the impugned judgment and order passedby the High
Court and even from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Land
Acquisition Collector filed before the High Court, which is reproduced
by the High Court in the impugned judgment and order in paragraph 6, it
was the specific case on behalf of the appellants that the possession of
the land in question was taken over on 03.12.2012 after preparing
possession proceeding on the spot and was handed over to the beneficiary
department, i.e., Delhi Development Authority (DDA) immediately. It
was also pointed out that the compensation was also sent to the Reference
Court on 28.10.2014 as there was an apportionment dispute.
2.1 In spite of above, solely on the ground that the compensation
was not tendered prior to coming into force of the Act, 2013 and 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, the High Court has allowed the writ petition and
has declared that the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed under
Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.
2.2 The view taken by the High Court relying upon the decision of
this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr.
(supra) is unsustainable in view of the Constitution Bench decision 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,
LAND AND BUILDING DEPT. THROUGH SECY., GOVT. OF
NCT OF DELHI v. MAHIPAL SINGH
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
612
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 16 S.C.R.
(2014) 3 SCC 183] is hereby overruled and all other decisions in
which Pune Municipal Corpn. [Pune Municipal Corpn. v.
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.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.