It is always open to the appropriate government under Section 24(2), if it so chooses, to initiate proceedings for acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of 2013 Act. But, till that happens, the land, which is the subject matter of acquisition which has lapsed, cannot be retained by the acquiring authority or its transferee.
The primary contention in the instant matter was that possession of the subject land though was taken, the award under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (2013 Act). Award was infact made in the year 1987. The compensation was yet to be paid and accordingly it was contended that the requirements of section 24(2) of the 2013 Act stands fulfilled and Petitioner thus become entitled to a declaration that the subject acquisition under the 1894 Act has lapsed.
It was held that the logical sequitur of the acquisition having lapsed by virtue of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act is that the acquiring authority would have no legal basis for retaining the said land. It is always open to the appropriate government under Section 24(2), if it so chooses, to initiate proceedings for acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of 2013 Act. But, till that happens, the land, which is the subject matter of acquisition which has lapsed, cannot be retained by the acquiring authority or its transferee.
[Dewan Harbhagwan Nanda (HUF) vs. Union of India & Ors.]
(Delhi HC, 16.09.2014)