- (1.) In the instant case, the acquisition was made vide notifications dated 15.07.1998 and 04.06.1999 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 followed by award dated 31.05.2001. The dispossession of the petitioners was stayed by this Court on 04.07.2001 and the stay order is operating till date.
(2.) In the light of interpretation of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the '2013 Act') given by Hon'ble Supreme Court in its recent decision dated 07.05.2014 passed in Civil Appeals No. 5478-5483 of 2014, Union of India and others v. Shiv Raj and others, 2014 3 RCR(Civ) 357 the acquisition proceedings in the instant case are deemed to have lapsed. In the cited decision, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:- "4. Limitation As regards this item relating to the period spent during litigation would also be accounted for the purpose of determining whether the period of five years has to be counted or not, it should be clarified that it will apply only to cases where awards were passed under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, 5 years or more prior to 1.1.2014 as specified in Section 24(2) of the Act, to avoid any ambiguity. Since this legislation has been passed with the objective of benefiting the land-losers, this interpretation is consistent with that objective and also added as a matter of abundant caution that the period spent in litigation challenging an award cannot be excluded for the purpose of determining whether the period of five years has elapsed or not. If the possession has not been taken or compensation has not been paid due to the challenge to the land acquisition proceedings, the pendente lite period will be included to determine the five year period and including such period if the award was made five years or more prior to the commencement of the Act, then the said acquisition proceedings will be deemed to have elapsed and fresh proceedings, if so desired, will have to be initiated in accordance with the new Act." The objects and reasons of the Act 2013 and particularly clause 18 thereof fortify the view taken by this court in the judgments referred to hereinabove. Clause 18 thereof reads as under: "The benefits under the new law would be available in all the cases of land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where award has not been made or possession of land has not been taken." 20. However, the aforesaid appeals have to be decided in the light of above settled legal propositions. The admitted facts of the case remains that the Respondents-Tenure Holders had filed objections under Section 5A of the Act 1894 as admitted in the affidavit filed by Smt. Usha Chaturvedi, Deputy Secretary (Land Acquisition), Land and Building Department, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi, filed in January 2014 before this court. The award No. 15/87-88 had been made on 5.6.1987 and possession has not been taken till date though compensation has been deposited with the Revenue Department, which cannot be termed as 'deemed payment' as has been held in case of Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr." Consequently, the impugned notifications dated 15.07.1998 and 04.06.1999 and award dated 31.05.2001 qua the petitioners are set aside. The respondents shall, however, be at liberty to re-acquire the subject property in accordance with law and provisions of 2013 Act.;