Bhupendra Kumar Mishra vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Sanjay Yadav, J.—Heard on admission.

Contending that the land belonging to the petitioner and other family members, bearing Khasra No. 3454, 3459, 3442, 3448 and 1138, respectively, admeasuring 0.0185, 0.236 and 0.102 hectare though subjected to acquisition under land Acquisition Act, 1894 for Bansagar Canal Project and the Award having been passed; however, since the amount of compensation is not paid and subject land being not acquired, with the commencement of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency In Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and by virtue of provisions contained under sub-section (2) of Section 24 the acquisition proceedings having lapsed, petitioners are entitled for benefit which enure u/s 24 of 2013 Act.

Section 24 of Act, 2013 provides for:

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case of land acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894,-

(a) where no award u/s 11 of the said Land Acquisition Act has been made, then, all provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation shall apply; or

(b) where an award under said section 11 has been made then such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the said Land Acquisition Act, as if the said Act has not been repeated.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where an award under the said Section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act:

Provided that where 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 beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition u/s 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

Thus, the action taken under the provisions of 1894 Act has been saved. As to operation of sub-section (2) of Section 24, petitioners fails to establish that the land in question has not been acquired and the compensation not paid. The petitioners have relied on the communication dated 3.3.2014 by the Bank whereon it is stated that on 14.7.2013 on telephone the Canal Division has directed not to disburse the amount, ipso facto, will not tantamount to nonpayment of compensation. To ascertain as to reason for non clearance, it was open for the petitioners to approach the Authorities. The petitioners having not done so cannot claim revocation of Award which has been passed. And in absence of a certificate by Land Acquisition Officer, it cannot be presumed that the land in question is not acquired.

Since no relief can be granted, petition fails and is dismissed. No costs.