Retrospective effect of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (‘2013 Act’)

The Supreme Court delivered in first judgement on the newly enacted land Acquisition Act, wherein it laid down the circumstances wherein the 2013 Act would have retrospective operation

The Supreme Court delivered in first judgement on the newly enacted land Acquisition Act, wherein it laid down the circumstances wherein the 2013 Act would have retrospective operation • 2013 Act puts in place entirely new regime for compulsory acquisition of land and provides for new scheme for compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement to the affected families whose land has been acquired or proposed to be acquired or affected by such acquisition. • Section 24(1) begins with non obstante clause and this provision has been given an overriding effect to over all other provisions of 2013 Act. It is provided in clause (a) that where the land acquisition proceedings have been initiated under the 1894 Act but no award under Section 11 is made then the provisions of 2013 Act shall apply relating to the determination of compensation. • Section 24(1)(b) makes provision that where land acquisition proceedings have been initiated under the 1894 Act and award has been made under Section 11, then such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the 1894 Act as if that Act has not been repealed. • Section 24(2) also begins with non obstante clause and has overriding effect over Section 24(1). Section 24(2) enacts that in relation to the land acquisition proceedings initiated under 1894 Act, where an award has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act and either of the two contingencies is satisfied, namely, (i) physical possession of the land has not been taken or (ii) the compensation has not been paid, such acquisition proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed. • On the lapse of such acquisition proceedings, if the appropriate government still chooses to acquire the land which was the subject matter of acquisition under the 1894 Act then it has to initiate the proceedings afresh under the 2013 Act. The proviso appended to Section 24(2) deals with a situation where in respect of the acquisition initiated under the 1894 Act an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of land holdings has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries then all the beneficiaries specified in Section 4 notification become entitled to compensation under 2013 Act. Section 31 of the 1894 Act makes provision for payment of compensation or deposit of the same in the Court. The provision requires that the Collector should tender payment of compensation as awarded by him to the persons interested who are entitled to compensation. If due to happening of any contingency as contemplated in Section 31(2), the compensation has not been paid, the Collector should deposit the amount of compensation in the court to which reference can be made under Section 18. The mandatory nature of the provision in Section 31(2) with regard to deposit of the compensation in the Court is further fortified by the provisions contained in Sections 32, 33 and 34. • For the purposes of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, the compensation shall be regarded as “paid” if the compensation has been offered to the person interested and such compensation has been deposited in the Court where reference under Section 18 can be made on happening of any of the contingencies contemplated under Section 31(2) of the 1894 Act. Thus, the compensation may be said to have been “paid” within the meaning of Section 24(2) when the Collector (or Land Acquisition Officer) has discharged his obligation and deposited the amount of compensation in Court and made that amount available to the interested person to be dealt with as provided in Sections 32 and 33. • In the instant case, the award pertaining to the subject land was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act and the compensation so awarded was neither been paid to the landowners/persons interested nor deposited in the Court. Deposit of compensation amount in the government treasury could not be held as equivalent to compensation paid to the landowners/persons interested. Accordingly, the subject land acquisition proceedings would be deemed as lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. • Section 114(1) of the 2013 Act repeals 1894 Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 114, however, makes Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 applicable with regard to the effect of repeal but this is subject to the provisions in the 2013 Act . • Under Section 24(2) land acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act, by legal fiction, are deemed to have lapsed where award has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of 2013 Act and possession of the land is not taken or compensation has not been paid. • The legal fiction under Section 24(2) comes into operation as soon as conditions stated therein are satisfied. The applicability of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act being subject to Section 24(2), there is no merit in the contention of the Corporation. [Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & Ors.] (SC, 24.01.2014)