- (1.) The petitioner before this Court seeks quashing of the notification dated 13.7.2012 and dated 14.8.2013 issued in exercise of power under Section 4 and Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as Act 1884) respectively. He has also prayed for quashing of the award dated 30.12.2013 as modified on 27.5.2014. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to prepare a fresh award in accordance with the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. We have heard Sri V.K. Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Mahendra Pratap on behalf of the Respondent Development Authority as well as standing counsel.
(2.) From the records of the writ petition it is apparent that the notification under Section 4 and under Section 6 of the Act of 1894 published on 21.7.2012 and 16.8.2012 respectively. The award in respect of the land acquired was made on 30.12.2013, (reference Annexure No. 4 in the present writ petition.) It is further apparent from the record that the modifications were made in the said award under the order dated 27.5.2014 by the Special Land Acquisition Officer/Additional District Magistrate, Finance and Revenue, Irrigation Ghaziabad.
(3.) According to the petitioner since the date of notification of the award is subsequent to the enforcement of Act of 2013 i.e. subsequent to 1.1.2014, the entire proceedings stands vitiated. In the alternative it is contended that in fact award has been made subsequent to the enforcement of Act, 2013, thus compensation has to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Act 2013 in view of Section 24(1)(a) of the Act 2013 while in the fact the compensation has been determined under the old Act, the entire award is bad. It is also stated that since possession of the land has not been taken and compensation has not been paid, the entire proceedings must lapse in view of Section 24 of the Act of 2013.;