FAIZABAD-AYODHYA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, FAIZABAD versus DR. RAJESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS.

FAIZABAD-AYODHYA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, FAIZABAD versus DR. RAJESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS.

Where, as on 01.01.2014 (commencement of the Act, 2013), no award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 had been declared solely because of pendency of proceedings and/or interim stay orders obtained by landowners, such landowners are not entitled to claim the benefit of Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013; instead the appropriate authority must declare the award under Section 11 of the Act, 1894 and determine compensation under the Act, 1894, taking into account Section 114 of the Act, 2013 read with Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 where applicable

Parties
Appellant: Faizabad-Ayodhya Development Authority, Faizabad; Appellant: Moradabad Development Authority; Respondent: Dr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court From High Court Judgment Directing Award Under Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013
Outcome
Appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Section 24(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Section 11 and Section 11 a of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Principle of Restitution, Interim Orders and Stays Affecting Land Acquisition
Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Administrative Law Section 24(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Section 11 and Section 11 a of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Principle of Restitution Interim Orders and Stays Affecting Land Acquisition

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Faizabad-Ayodhya Development Authority, Faizabad

Appellant

Moradabad Development Authority

Appellant

Dr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court From High Court Judgment Directing Award Under Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether landowners who obtained interim stay of acquisition proceedings such that no award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 existed on 01.01.2014 are entitled to compensation under Section 24(1)(a) of the Act, 2013
  2. 2 Whether a litigant who obtains an interim order and thereby prevents declaration of an award can later claim the benefit of the Act, 2013 for higher compensation
  3. 3 Application of the principle of restitution and exclusion of periods of interim court orders in computing applicability of Sections 24(1) and 24(2)

Ratio Decidendi

Where, as on 01.01.2014 (commencement of the Act, 2013), no award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 had been declared solely because of pendency of proceedings and/or interim stay orders obtained by landowners, such landowners are not entitled to claim the benefit of Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013; instead the appropriate authority must declare the award under Section 11 of the Act, 1894 and determine compensation under the Act, 1894, taking into account Section 114 of the Act, 2013 read with Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 where applicable

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed

Orders

  • Impugned High Court judgments and orders quashed and set aside
  • Concerned appropriate Authority(s) directed to declare the award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the lands in question and determine compensation under the provisions of the Act, 1894 taking into consideration Section 114 of the Act, 2013 read with Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897...