M/S.Ansal Properties & Infrast.Ltd. vs State Of Haryana .
- Neutral2017 INSC 703
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where compensation has not been paid to the owners and land acquisition proceedings initiated before the commencement of the 2013 Act have remained pending, such proceedings lapse and the State must initiate fresh acquisition proceedings under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 within six months, failing which the State cannot claim any right over the acquired land.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10017 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 20511 OF 2008 ]
M/S.ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRAST.LTD. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The issue pertains to the land acquisition
proceedings initiated by the respondent-State.
During the pendency of the proceedings before this
Court, in view of the introduction of The Right to
Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 (in short, “2013 Act”), the question arose as to
whether the acquisition proceedings have lapsed or
not.
3. On the admitted position that the compensation
has not been paid to the owners, in view of the
settled position, this Court has to give a
declaration that the proceedings have lapsed. Signature Not Verified Ordered accordingly.
Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2017.09.04 17:12:00 IST Reason:
4. Now that the entire acquired land has been used
by the State, the only option available to them is to
initiate fresh proceedings under the 2013 Act within 2
six months from today.
5. We make it clear that in case no steps are taken
for acquisition under the 2013 Act, the
respondent-State shall not lay any claim in respect
of the land in dispute.
6. With the above observations and directions, this
appeal is disposed of.
No costs.
.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J. [ R. BANUMATHI ]
New Delhi;
August 03, 2017.
3
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.6 SECTION IV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 20511 of 2008
M/S.ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRAST.LTD. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Respondent(s)
Date : 03-08-2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
For Appellant(s) Mr. Chinmayee Chandra, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Vinay Arora, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Jain, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG Mr. Anil Grover, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Bansal, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, AOR Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Adv.
Mr. Satish Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Ugra Shankar Prasad, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed
non-reportable Judgment.
Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (RENU DIWAN) COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free