Authority: High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
Order Date: 30 November 2016
Case Overview
- Petitioners: Ashok Kumar and others, residents of Sunderpur village, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra.
- Respondents: The State of Haryana and others.
- Writ Petition No.15047 of 2016 (O&M) challenging land acquisition vide Award No.3 dated 21‑07‑2006 (also referenced as Award dated 27‑01‑2006).
- Claim: Acquisition lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 because compensation was neither paid nor deposited with the Reference Court as required by Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; petitioners assert possession of the land.
Court Reasoning
- The court accepted the concession that compensation was not paid or deposited, satisfying the condition for lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
- Citing the order dated 27‑10‑2016 in CWP No.17464 of 2007 (Satnam Singh & another vs. State of Haryana), the court held the acquisition deemed to have lapsed.
- Noted that Section 24(2) expressly permits reacquisition of land where a prior acquisition has lapsed.
- Directed that the petitioners must maintain the status quo for one year, keeping the land free from all encumbrances and preventing creation of third‑party rights, so that the State may reacquire the land for a public purpose if required.
Final Outcome
- The acquisition of the petitioners’ land vide the referenced award is declared lapsed.
- Petitioners are ordered to preserve the land in its existing condition for a period of one year, without any encumbrances, enabling possible future reacquisition by the State.
Topics: Land Acquisition, Judicial Order