(A) U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, Section 28, 29, 30, 55 – Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Section 24(1) – Land acquisition – Non-issuance of a pre-acquisition notice– The 1965 Act mandates issuance of a pre-acquisition notice to such individuals whose land/property falls within the purview of the proposed Scheme – Held that on a liberal reading to such provision, the appellant, at best, could have claimed deemed or substantial compliance of audi alteram partem rule provided that Khasra No. 673 was expressly notified in the public notice dated 17.07.2004 – Held that in the absence of any public or individual notice proposing to acquire Khasra No. 673, the observations made by the High Court to the extent that the respondents have been denied an effective opportunity to submit objections to oppose the acquisition in question, appears to be correct and based upon the record – Impugned judgment to the extent it holds that the acquisition process qua Khasra No.673 stands vitiated on account of noncompliance with the prescribed procedure, does not call for any interference. (Para 16 and 17)
(B) U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, Section 28, 29, 30, 55 – Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Section 24(1) – Land acquisition – Acquisition could not attain finality – Acquisition process qua Khasra No.673 stands vitiated on account of noncompliance with the prescribed procedure – Since the acquisition could not attain finality before 01.01.2014, the Acquiring Authority/Board are obligated to pay compensation to the expropriated owners, as is to be assessed in accordance with Section 24(1) of the 2013 Act -Procedure prescribed under Chapter II of the 2013 Act, mandates to carry out the Social Impact Assessment Study in certain situations – The adherence to such a cumbersome procedure in the instant case will be an exercise in futility because a major part of the acquired land has already been utilized for the notified public purpose and that the study referred to above, will delay the assessment and payment of compensation to the true tenure holders/ owners of Khasra No.673 – Appropriate Government directed to dispense with the procedure contemplated under Chapter II of the 2013 Act – The Prescribed Authority permitted to accord an opportunity to submit objections under Section 15 of the 2013 Act and, thereafter, pass an award as per Section 24(1) of the 2013 Act – Awarded amount shall be kept in a nationalized bank in the FDR where it can fetch the maximum rate of interest till the title dispute between the respondents and other claimants is resolved by a court of competent jurisdiction. (Para 18 to 20)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2024 STPL(Web) 210 SC
[2024 INSC 210]
U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. Chandra Shekhar And Ors.
Civil Appeal No. 3855 of 2024 (Arising Out of Slp (C) NO. 779 OF 2016)-Decided on 05-03-2024
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2024-STPLWeb-210-SC.pdf
