OVERVIEW ON LAND ACQUISITION

The important information on land acquisition under old and new act...

 

OVERVIEW ON OLD LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894

The land acquisition act of 1894 was created for the purpose of facilitating the government to acquire privately held land for public purposes. The word "public purpose", as defined by the act, refers to the acquisition of land for putting up educational institutions or schemes such as housing, health or slum clearance, apart from the projects for rural planning or formation of sites. The word "government" refers to the central government if the purpose for acquisition is for the union and for all other purposes it refers to the state government. It is not necessary that all the acquisition has to be initiated by the government alone. Local authorities, societies registered under the societies registration act, 1860 andco-operative societies established under the co-operative societies act can also acquire the land for developmental activities through the government.

History

Regulation I of the land acquisition act was first enacted by the British government in the year 1824. Its application was throughout the whole of the Bengal provinces immediately subject to the Presidency of Fort William. The rules empowered the government to acquire immovable property at, what was deemed to be, a fair and reasonable price for construction of roads,canals or other public purposes. In 1850 some of the provisions of regulation I of 1824 were extended to Calcutta through Act I of 1850, with a view to confirm the land titles in Calcutta that were acquired for public purposes. At that time a railway network was being developed and it was felt that legislation was needed for acquiring land for the purposes of the railways. Building act XXVII of 1839 and act XX of 1852 were introduced to obviate the difficulties pertaining to the construction of public buildings in the cities of Bombay and Madras. Act VI of 1857 was the first full enactment, which had application to the whole of British India. It repealed all previous enactments relating to acquisition and its object. Subsequently act X of 1870 came in to effect which was further replaced by land acquisition act 1894, a completely self contained act, in order to purge some of the flaws of act X of 1870.

After independence in 1947, the Indian government adopted “Land Acquisition Act-1894” as a tool for land acquisition. Since then various amendments have been made to the 1894 act from time to time. Despite these amendments the administrative procedures have remained same.

Principles Of Compulsory Acquisition:

Principles for legislation on compulsory acquisition should include:

• Protection of due process and fair procedure. Rules that place reasonable constraints on the power of the government to compulsorily acquire land strengthen the confidence of people in the justice system, empower people to protect their land rights, and increase the perception of tenure security. Rules should provide for appropriate advance consultation, participatory planning and accessible mechanisms for appeals, and should limit the discretion of officials.

• Good governance. Agencies that compulsorily acquire land should be accountable for the good faith implementation of the legislation. Laws that are not observed by local officials undermine the legitimacy of compulsory acquisition. Good governance reduces the abuse of power and opportunities for corruption.

• Equivalent compensation. Claimants should be paid compensation which is no more or no less than the loss resulting from the compulsory acquisition of their land. Laws should ensure that affected owners and occupants receive equivalent compensation, whether in money or alternative land. Regulations should set out clear and consistent valuation bases for achieving this.

 Constitutional Sanction

The constitutions of many countries provide for both the protection of private property rights and the power of the government to acquire land without the willing consent of the owner. There is, however, great variation. Some countries have broadly defined provisions for compulsory acquisition, while those of other countries are more specific.

Constitutional frameworks that have broadly defined provisions concentrate on basic principles and often simply assert the power to compulsorily acquire land as the single exception to fully protected private property rights. For example, the constitution of the United States of America mandates that: “No person...shall be deprived of...property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” (Article V). Similarly, Rwanda’s constitution states: “Private property, whether individual or collective, shall be inviolable. No infringement shall take place except for the reason of public utility, in the cases and manner established by the law, and in return for fair and prior compensation.” (Title II, Article 23).

Such constitutions leave the details of compulsory acquisition to other legislation and, in some instances, to the interpretation of the courts. Other constitutional frameworks specify in detail the mechanisms by which the government can compulsorily acquire land. They tend to include a specific list of the purposes for which land may be acquired. For example, Ghana’s constitution includes provisions detailing exactly what kinds of projects allow the government to use its power of compulsory acquisition, and specifies that displaced inhabitants should be resettled on suitable alternative land (Chapter Five, Article 20). Chile’s constitution identifies the purposes for which land Compulsory acquisition of land and compensation may be compulsorily acquired, the right of property holders to contest the action in court, a framework for the calculation of compensation, the mechanisms by which the state must pay people who are deprived of their property, and the timing and sequence of possession (Chapter III, Article 19, §24).

Most countries supplement the constitutional basis for compulsory acquisition, whether broadly or specifically defined, with extensive laws and regulations. National or sub-national laws usually describe in detail the purposes for which compulsory acquisition can be used, the agencies and officials with the power to compulsorily acquire land, the procedures to be followed, the methods for determining compensation, the rights of affected owners or occupants and how grievances are to be addressed. The regulations that accompany these laws may be particularly important as they often provide the acquiring agency with instructions on how to carry out compulsory acquisition during all phases of the process.

The laws governing compulsory acquisition are part property law and part administrative law which dictates governance procedures. Principles of administrative justice and good governance often require that such powers are bound by legal rules which allow for hearings and appeals, and are subject to judicial review. 

 

Compulsory Acquisition: What Rights To Be Compensated?

Compulsory acquisition is commonly associated with the transfer of ownership of a land parcel in its entirety. This may occur in large scale projects (e.g. construction of dams or airports) as well as in smaller projects (e.g. construction of hospitals or schools). However, compulsory acquisition may be also used to acquire part of a parcel, e.g. for the construction of a road. In some cases, the acquisition of portion of a land parcel may leave the remainder of the land intact. The remainder may be large enough for continued use by the owner or occupant despite its reduced value; or it may be so small that the person can no longer use it to maintain a living. In other cases, a new road may cut through the middle of the parcel, leaving the remainder divided into several unconnected pieces, some of which may be without access routes. In some countries, the governing legislation may allow the landowner to require the acquiring agency to acquire the whole parcel.

The use of specific portions of a land parcel may be also acquired for easements or servitudes to provide for the passage of pipelines and cables. Rights acquired usually include the right to enter the parcel to make repairs. The rights acquired may be granted temporarily or permanently, and may be transferable to others. People may be deprived of some enjoyment of their land even if it is not acquired. For example, the construction of a highway may cause the value of neighboring parcels to decrease because of the increased noise. Traditionally such losses have not been regarded as being eligible for compensation but legislation is increasingly providing for at least some compensation in such circumstances. A project may also increase the values of neighboring parcels.

Some equivalence may be provided through changed tax burdens: people whose land declined in value may pay less property taxation while others may find their tax bill has increased to reflect the higher land values. People may also suffer a loss when governments impose new and significant restrictions on the uses to which land may be put. Such zoning or land use controls may substantially reduce the usefulness or value of particular parcels.

 

The payment of compensation for such losses where the land has not changed hands is not widely adopted. However, some countries do provide for compensation in such cases. The actions (known as “regulatory takings” or “planning compensation”) are complex and their treatment is beyond the scope of this guide.

Compulsory acquisition is not limited to contexts in which the state seeks to acquire land that is privately owned. Full private ownership of land does not exist in some countries, and the state is the owner of all land. In other countries, the state retains ownership of substantial areas of land. A range of private occupancy, lease or use rights may be permitted over such state-owned land.

Compensation has to be provided for valuation of land that is privately owned, as well as of private rights in state-owned land, and of customary and informal rights.

Procedure For Compulsory Acquisition:

Compulsory acquisition is a power of government, but it is also the process by which that power is exercised. Attention to the procedures of compulsory acquisition is critical if a government’s exercise of this power is to be efficient, fair and legitimate. Processes for the compulsory acquisition of land for projectbased, planned development are usually different from processes for acquiring land during emergencies or for land reforms. Yet other processes may exist for electricity companies and others to acquire easements or servitudes. In general, a well designed compulsory acquisition process for a development project should include the following steps: 

1. Planning: Determining the different land options available for meeting the public need in a participatory fashion. The exact location and size of the land to be acquired is identified. Relevant data are collected. The impact of the project is assessed with the participation of the affected people.

2. Publicity: Notice is published to inform owners and occupants in the designated area that the government intends to acquire their land. People are requested to submit claims for compensation for land to be acquired.

The notice describes the purpose and process, including important deadlines and the procedural rights of people. Public meetings provide people with an opportunity to learn more about the project, and to express their opinions and needs for compensation.

3. Valuation and submission of claims: Equivalent compensation for the land to be acquired is determined at the stated date of valuation. Owners and occupants submit their claims. The land is valued by the acquiring agency or another government body. The acquiring agency considers the submitted claim, and offers what it believes to be appropriate compensation. Negotiations may follow.

4. Payment of compensation: The government pays people for their land or resettles them on alternate land.

5. Possession: The government takes ownership and physical possession of the land for the intended purpose.

6. Appeals: Owners and occupants are given the chance to contest the compulsory acquisition, including the decision to acquire the land, the process by which the land was acquired, and the amount of compensation offered.

7. Restitution: Opportunity for restitution of land if the purpose for which the land was used is no longer relevant.

Principles Of Compulsory Acquisition Of Land

• The land and land rights to be acquired should be kept to a minimum. For example, if the creation of an easement or servitude can serve the purpose of the project, there is no need to acquire ownership of the land parcel.

 

• Participatory planning processes should involve all affected parties, including owners and occupants, government and non-governmental organizations.

 

• Due process should be defined in law with specified time limits so that people can understand and meet important deadlines.

• Procedures should be transparent and flexible, and undertaken in good faith.

• Notice should be clear in written and oral form, translated into appropriate languages, with procedures clearly explained and advice about where to get help.

• Assistance should be provided so owners and occupants can participate effectively in negotiations on valuation and compensation.

• The process should be supervised and monitored to ensure that the acquiring agency is accountable for its actions, and personal discretion is limited.

 

• The government should take possession of the land after owners and occupants have been paid at least partial compensation, accompanied by clearly defined compensation guarantees.

Compensation:

Compensation, whether in monetary terms or the replacement of land, is an essential requirement of compulsory acquisition. As a direct result of government action, people lose their homes, their land, and at times their means of livelihood. Compensation is to repay them for these losses, and should be based on principles of equity and equivalence. The principle of equivalence is crucial to determining compensation: affected owners and occupants should be neither enriched nor impoverished as a result of the compulsory acquisition. Financial compensation on the basis of equivalence of only the loss of land rarely achieves the aim of putting those affected in th same position as they were before the acquisition; the money paid cannot fully replace what is lost. In some countries, there is legal provision recognizing this in the form of additional compensation to reflect the compulsory nature of the acquisition. In practice, given that the aim of the acquisition is to support development, there are strong arguments for compensation to improve the position of those affected wherever possible.

The calculation of compensation is based on the value of the land rights and improvements to the land, and on any related costs. The determination of equivalent compensation can be difficult, particularly when land markets are weak or do not exist, when land is held communally, or when people have only rights to use the land. Many factors can lead to inadequate compensation. Legislation should ensure fair processes for determining valuation and compensation. While the public interest in keeping costs as low as possible is important, this concern should not deprive people of the equivalent compensation they need in order re-establish their lives after the loss of their land.

Procedure For Valuation And Compensation

During the valuation phase, the acquiring agency and the people whose land is being acquired gather information and evidence to support their arguments for the compensation values they believe to be equitable. This work is triggered by the notice of intention to compulsorily acquire land. The notice of intention should set a deadline by which each affected owner or occupant submits a claim for compensation.

Responsibility for the valuation of land varies from one country to another. In some countries the work is done by or for the acquiring agency while in other countries the valuations are the responsibility of independent commissions. The notice of intention should set a deadline by which each affected owner or occupant submits a claim for compensation. At some point after notice has been given, the project’s valuers must enter the land to inspect it and all improvements in order to determine their value. Owners and occupants should hire their own valuators, or find other ways to determine the value of their land.

Conclusion:

In the end the author would like to state that, my hypothesis is partially correct and partially incorrect, as:

1. Author`s first hypothesis is correct, which says that, there is a same process of acquisition for agricultural land as well as non- agricultural land. As in both the cases, whole authority to decide as well as all the powers of taking action lies in the collector. Further the government follows the same procedure of acquisition of land, no matter whether it is Agricultural or commercial or residential. The land acquisition act, 1894 only deals with the acquisition of private properties and does not specify regarding its character, as of agricultural, commercial or residential. So the Act does not make any distinction in providing the procedure for acquisition of land, whether agricultural or non- agricultural.

2. Whereas the second hypothesis is incorrect, which provides that, mode of ascertaining the value of compensation on acquisition of agricultural and non- agricultural is same. Whereas the actual position of law is that, the compensation and award on acquisition of agricultural land is determined on the basis of yielding capacity of the land, whereas in case of non- agricultural land it is determined on the basis market value of the land. As per Section 23 of the Act, the compensation on acquisition of agricultural land is determined by a formula, i.e. total yielding capacity in a year of a land multiplied by 12, which signifies the total yielding capacity of land for 12 years.

But in acquisition of non- agricultural land no such formula is provided, it just says that acquisition will be held on the current market price of the land.

IMPORTANT JUDGMENTS ON CANCELLATION OF LAND ACQUISITION

UNDER NEW LAND ACQUISITION ACT 2013

 

(1)

SUPREME COURT OF INDA

RAM KISHAN & ORS VS. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

[I.A. NOS. 3-4 OF 2014 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.3872 OF 2010]

V.GOPALA GOWDA, J.

I.A. No. 4 for exemption from filing official translation is ordered.

I.A. No.3 in Civil Appeal No. 3872 of 2010 is filed by the applicants/appellant Nos. 24-28 (for short 'the applicants') seeking direction and appropriate orders for disposal of this appeal in terms of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short 'the Act of 2013'). The appellant-land owners have come to this Court questioning the correctness of the judgment and order dated 13.03.2008 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition No.3823 of 2008, wherein the writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the same was not maintainable after passing of the Award. The brief facts are mentioned hereunder. The appellant nos. 24-28 are the owners and in possession of the land in question bearing khewat no. 260 Khasra no.46 killa nos.1(3-18), 2(7-14), 3/1(0-16), 8/2(0-16), 9(8-0), 10(6-1) and 26(0-5) totally measuring 27 kanals 13 marlas of land situated in the revenue estate of Village Kumashpur Tehsil and Distict Sonipat(Haryana). The appellants have been in continuous possession of the aforesaid land in question till date and harvesting crops. On 20.01.2003 the respondents published a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the L.A. Act') bearing No. LAC (F)-NTLA/2003/137. Thereafter on 16.01.2004, the respondents issued notification under Section 6 of the L.A. Act bearing No. LAC (F)- NTLA/2004/190. The Land Acquisition Collector passed an award bearing No.7 of the year 2006-2007 dated 14.01.2006. The appellants challenged the said notification in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana vide Civil Writ Petition No.3823 of 2008. The High Court vide its judgment and order dated 13.03.2008 dismissed the writ petition by assigning untenable reasons. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants have filed this appeal. The learned counsel for the appellants placed strong reliance on the application filed under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 which has come into force w.e.f. 01.01.2014, the said provision is extracted hereunder:- "24(2)Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the LA Act, 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 whether 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 specified in the notifications for acquisition under Section 4 of the said land acquisition and shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act." It is contended that in the instant case, the appellants are fulfilling the requirements of Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 as the physical possession of the land involved in these proceedings has not been taken till date and no compensation is paid to the appellants though the award has been made on 14.01.2006. Therefore, the said provision under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 squarely applies to the case of the appellants and the land acquisition proceedings in so far as the appellants land is concerned be deemed to have elapsed. Further, the learned counsel for the appellants placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in the cases of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & Ors.[1], Bharat Kumar v. State of Haryana & Another[2], Bimla Devi & Others v. State of Haryana & Others[3] and Union of India & others v. Shiv Raj & Others[4] and submitted that the ratio in the aforesaid judgments squarely apply to the present case on hand. Thus, the acquisition proceedings qua the land of the appellants have to be declared as lapsed by applying the provisions of Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. After examining the facts and circumstances of the case on hand, we are of the considered view that neither the possession of the land in question has been taken by the respondents nor was the compensation paid to the appellants though more than five years have passed since the date of the award passed on 14.01.2006. Therefore, the acquisition proceedings of the land of the appellants have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013. The said provision has been succinctly interpreted by the three Judge Bench decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation (supra). The relevant paras 20 and 21 of the aforesaid case is extracted hereunder:- "20.......it is clear that the award pertaining to the subject land has been made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act. It is also admitted position that compensation so awarded has neither been paid to the landowners/persons interested nor deposited in the court. The deposit of compensation amount in the Government treasury is of no avail and cannot be held to be equivalent to compensation paid to the landowners/persons interested. We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that the subject land acquisition proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. 21. The argument on behalf of the Corporation that the subject land acquisition proceedings have been concluded in all respects under the 1894 Act and that they are not affected at all in view of Section 114(2) of the 2013 Act, has no merit at all, and is noted to be rejected. Section 114(1) of the 2013 Act repeals the 1894 Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 114, however, makes Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 applicable with regard to the effect of repeal but this is subject to the provisions in the 2013 Act. Under Section 24(2) land acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act, by legal fiction, are deemed to have lapsed where award has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act and possession of the land is not taken or compensation has not been paid. The legal fiction under Section 24(2) comes into operation as soon as conditions stated therein are satisfied. The applicability of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act being subject to Section 24(2), there is no merit in the contention of the Corporation." 10. Further, reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in the case of Bimla Devi & Ors. (supra) and Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of Tamil Nadu & others[5], wherein the law laid down in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation (supra) was reiterated. In Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association (supra), it was held that the provision under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act does not exclude any period during which the land acquisition proceedings might have remained stayed on account of stay or injunction granted by any court. It was further held that the Legislature has consciously omitted to extend the period of five years indicated in Section 24(2) even if the proceedings had been delayed on account of an order of stay or injunction granted by a court of law or for any reason. 11. Further in the case of Shiv Raj & Ors. (supra), this Court discussed the circular issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Urban Development, Delhi Division wherein the legal opinion of the Solicitor General of India clarified the statutory provisions of the Act of 2013 with respect to lapsing of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013. The relevant para 25 is extracted hereunder:- "25..... 3.Interpretation of five years' period "With regard to this issue viz. interpretation of five years' period, two situations have been envisaged in cases where the acquisition has been initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 viz. (1) parties whose lands have been acquired have refused to accept the compensation and (2) parties whose lands have been acquired having just parted with physical possession of the land. However, in both the above situations, as on 1-1-2014, the period of 5 years would not have ended and in such cases, the advisory seeks to clarify that the new law shall apply only if the situation of pendency continues unchanged for a period that equals to or exceeds five years. In my view, it should be further clarified that in none of the cases the period of five years would have elapsed pursuant to an award made under Section 11 from the date of commencement of the Act and that the benefit of Section 24(2) will be available to those cases which are pending and where during pendency, the situation has remained unchanged with physical possession not being handed over or compensation not having been accepted and the period equals to or exceeds five years. 4. Limitation As regards this item relating to the period spent during litigation would also be accounted for the purpose of determining whether the period of five years has to be counted or not, it should be clarified that it will apply only to cases where awards were passed under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, 5 years or more prior to 1-1-2014 as specified in Section 24(2) of the Act, to avoid any ambiguity. Since this legislation has been passed with the objective of benefiting the land-losers, this interpretation is consistent with that objective and also [pic]added as a matter of abundant caution that the period spent in litigation challenging an award cannot be excluded for the purpose of determining whether the period of five years has elapsed or not. If the possession has not been taken or compensation has not been paid due to the challenge to the land acquisition proceedings, the pendente lite period will be included to determine the five year period and including such period if the award was made five years or more prior to the commencement of the Act, then the said acquisition proceedings will be deemed to have elapsed and fresh proceedings, if so desired, will have to be initiated in accordance with the new Act. The Objects and Reasons of the 2013 Act and particularly Clause 18 thereof fortify the view taken by this Court in the judgments referred to hereinabove. Clause 18 thereof reads as under: "18. The benefits under the new law would be available in all the cases of land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where award has not been made or possession of land has not been taken." 12. By considering the aforesaid decisions of this Court and the facts and circumstances of the present case on hand, we are of the view that physical possession of the land belonging to the appellants has not been taken by the respondents and more than five years have elapsed since the making of the award on 14.01.2006 when the Resettlement Act, 2013 came into force on 01.01.2014. Therefore, the conditions stated in Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 are fulfilled for allowing the plea of the appellants that the land acquisition proceedings be deemed to have elapsed. The said legal principle laid down by this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and other cases referred to supra with regard to interpretation of Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 are applicable with all fours to the fact situation on hand with respect to the land covered in this appeal and for granting relief as prayed by the appellants in this application. 13. In view of the aforesaid decisions of this Court referred to supra, and the findings and reasons recorded by us the application filed under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 is allowed. Consequently, having regard to the facts of this case, this appeal is allowed by quashing the acquisition proceedings in so far as the land of the applicants/appellant Nos. 24-28 are concerned. There shall be no order as to costs.

................................J. [V. GOPALA GOWDA]

................................J. [C. NAGAPPAN]

New Delhi,

November 27, 2014

(2)

SUPREME COURT OF INDA

Pune Municipal Corporation & ANR. Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & Ors.

 

[Civil Appeal No. 877 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30283 of 2008]

[Civil Appeal No. 878 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30455 of 2008]

[Civil Appeal No. 879 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30470 of 2008]

[Civil Appeal No. 880 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30467 of 2008]

[Civil Appeal No. 881 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30465 of 2008]

[Civil Appeal No. 882 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30469 of 2008]

[Civil Appeal No. 883 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30543 of 2008]

[Civil Appeal No. 884 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30546 of 2008]

[Civil Appeal No. 885 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30548 of 2008]

[Civil Appeal No. 886 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 15847of 2010]

 

JUDGMENT

R.M. LODHA, J.

Delay condoned in S.L.P. (C) Nos.15847-15855 of 2010.

1. Leave granted.

2. In these 18 appeals, by special leave, it is argued on behalf of the respondents-landowners that in view of Section 24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, '2013 Act') which has come into effect on 01.01.2014, the subject land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, '1894 Act') have lapsed. The question for decision relates to true meaning of the expression:"compensation has not been paid" occurring in Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. 3. It may not be necessary at all to go into the legality and correctness of the impugned judgment, if the subject land acquisition proceedings are held to have lapsed. We, therefore, deal with this aspectfirst. 4. The brief facts necessary for consideration of the above question are these. On 06.08.2002, the proposal of the Municipal Commissioner, Pune Municipal Corporation (for short, "Corporation") duly approved by the Standing Committee for acquisition of lands admeasuring 43.94 acres for development of "Forest Garden" was sent to the Collector, Pune. The Collector sanctioned the proposal and on 20.02.2003 forwarded the same to Special Land Acquisition Officer (15), Pune for further action. On 30.09.2004, the notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act was published in the official gazette. Then notices under Section 4(1) we reserved upon the landowners/interested persons. On 26.12.2005, the declaration under Section 6 was published in the official gazette and on 02.02.2006, it was also published at the site and on the notice board of the Office of Talaltti. Following the notices under Section 9, on31.01.2008 the Special Land Acquisition Officer made the award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act. 5. The landowners challenged the above acquisition proceedings before the Bombay High Court in 9 writ petitions. Of them, 2 were filed before making award and 7 after the award. The challenge to the acquisition proceedings and the validity of the award was laid on diverse grounds including i. absence of resolution of the General Body of the Corporation; ii. non-compliance with the provisions of Section 5A, iii. non-compliance with the provisions of Section 7, and iv. lapsing of acquisition proceedings under Section 11A. The High Court on consideration of the arguments advanced before it by the parties has held that the acquisition proceedings for the development of "Forest Garden" could not be initiated by the Commissioner with the mere approval of the Standing Committee without resolution of the General Body of the Corporation. The acquisition proceedings were also held bad in law for non-compliance of Section 7 and other statutory breaches. Inter alia, the High Court has quashed the acquisition proceedings and gave certain directions including restoration of possession. 6. It is argued on behalf of the landowners that by virtue of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, the subject acquisition shall be deemed to have been lapsed because the award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act is made more than five years prior to the commencement of 2013 Act and no compensation has been paid to the owners nor the amount of compensation has been deposited in the court by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. 7. On the other hand, on behalf of the Corporation and so also for the Collector, it is argued that the award was made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 31.01.2008 strictly in terms of 1894 Act and on the very day the landowners were informed regarding the quantum of compensation for their respective lands. Notices were also issued to the landowners to reach the office of the Special Land Acquisition Officer and receive the amount of compensation and since they neither received the compensation nor any request came from them to make reference to the District Court under Section 18, the compensation amounting to Rs.27 crores was deposited in the government treasury. It is, thus, submitted that there was no default on the part of the Special Land Acquisition Officer or the government and, hence, the acquisition proceedings have not lapsed. Moreover, reliance is also placed on Section 114 of the 2013 Act and it is argued that the concluded land acquisition proceedings are not at all affected by Section 24(2) and the only right that survives to the landowners is to receive compensation. 8. 2013 Act puts in place entirely new regime for compulsory acquisition of land and provides for new scheme for compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement to the affected families whose land has been acquired or proposed to be acquired or affected by such acquisition. 9. To turn, now, to the meaning of the expression "compensation has not been paid" in Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act and its effect on the subject acquisition, it is necessary to refer to Section 24 which reads as follows: "24. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, - a) Where no award under section 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 repealed. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (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 holding has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act." 10. Insofar as sub-section (1) of Section 24 is concerned, it begins with non obstante clause. By this, Parliament has given overriding effect to this provision over all other provisions of 2013 Act. It is provided in clause (a) that where the land acquisition proceedings have been initiated under the 1894 Act but no award under Section 11 is made, then the provisions of 2013 Act shall apply relating to the determination of compensation. Clause (b) of Section 24(1) makes provision that where land acquisition proceedings have been initiated under the 1894 Act and award has been made under Section 11, then such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the 1894 Act as if that Act has not been repealed. 11. Section 24(2) also begins with non obstante clause. This provision has overriding effect over Section 24(1). Section 24(2) enacts that in relation to the land acquisition proceedings initiated under 1894Act, where an award has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act and either of the two contingencies is satisfied, viz; (i) physical possession of the land has not been taken or (ii) the compensation has not been paid, such acquisition proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed. On the lapse of such acquisition proceedings, if the appropriate government still chooses to acquire the land which was the subject matter of acquisition under the 1894 Act then it has to initiate the proceedings afresh under the 2013 Act. The proviso appended to Section 24 (2) deals with a situation where in respect of the acquisition initiated under the 1894 Act 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 the beneficiaries specified in Section 4notification become entitled to compensation under 2013 Act. 12. To find out the meaning of the expression, "compensation has not been paid", it is necessary to have a look at Section 31 of the 1894Act. The said Section, to the extent it is relevant, reads as follows: "31. Payment of compensation or deposit of same in Court. - (1) On making an award under section 11, the Collector shall tender payment of the compensation awarded by him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award, and shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one or more of the contingencies mentioned in the next sub-section. (2) If they shall not consent to receive it, or if there be no person competent to alienate the land, or if there be any dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or as to the apportionment of it, the Collector shall deposit the amount of the compensation in the Court to which a reference under section 18 would be submitted:

xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx"

13. There is amendment in Maharashtra - Nagpur (City) in Section 31whereby in sub-section (1), after the words "compensation" and in sub-section (2), after the words, "the amount of compensation", the words "and costs if any" have been inserted. 14. Section 31(1) of the 1894 Act enjoins upon the Collector, on making an award under Section 11, to tender payment of compensation to persons interested entitled thereto according to award. It further mandates the Collector to make payment of compensation to them unless prevented by one of the contingencies contemplated in sub-section (2). The contingencies contemplated in Section 31(2) are: (i) the persons interested entitled to compensation do not consent to receive it (ii) there is no person competent to alienate the land and (iii) there is dispute as to the title to receive compensation or as to the apportionment of it. If due to any of the contingencies contemplated in Section 31(2), the Collector is prevented from making payment of compensation to the persons interested who are entitled to compensation, then the Collector is required to deposit the compensation in the court to which reference under Section 18 may be made. 15. Simply put, Section 31 of the 1894 Act makes provision for payment of compensation or deposit of the same in the court. This provision requires that the Collector should tender payment of compensation as awarded by him to the persons interested who are entitled to compensation. If due to happening of any contingency as contemplated in Section 31(2), the compensation has not been paid, the Collector should deposit the amount of compensation in the court to which reference can be made under Section 18. 16. The mandatory nature of the provision in Section 31(2) with regard to deposit of the compensation in the court is further fortified by the provisions contained in Sections 32, 33 and 34. As a matter of fact, Section 33 gives power to the court, on an application by a person interested or claiming an interest in such money, to pass an order to invest the amount so deposited in such government or other approved securities and may direct the interest or other proceeds of any such investment to be accumulated and paid in such manner as it may consider proper so that the parties interested therein may have the benefit there from as they might have had from the land in respect whereof such money shall have been deposited or as near thereto as may be. 17. While enacting Section 24(2), Parliament definitely had in its view Section 31 of the 1894 Act. From that one thing is clear that it did not intend to equate the word "paid" to "offered" or "tendered". But at the same time, we do not think that by use of the word "paid", Parliament intended receipt of compensation by the landowners/persons interested. In our view, it is not appropriate to give a literal construction to the expression "paid" used in this sub-section (sub-section (2) of Section 24). If a literal construction were to be given, then it would amount to ignoring procedure, mode and manner of deposit provided in Section 31(2) of the 1894 Act in the event of happening of any of the contingencies contemplated therein which may prevent the Collector from making actual payment of compensation. We are of the view, therefore, that for the purposes of Section 24(2), the compensation shall be regarded as "paid" if the compensation has been offered to the person interested and such compensation has been deposited in the court where reference under Section18 can be made on happening of any of the contingencies contemplated under Section 31(2) of the 1894 Act. In other words, the compensation may be said to have been "paid" within the meaning of Section 24(2) when the Collector (or for that matter Land Acquisition Officer) has discharged his obligation and deposited the amount of compensation in court and made that amount available to the interested person to be dealt with as provided in Sections 32 and 33. 18. 1894 Act being an expropriatory legislation has to be strictly followed. The procedure, mode and manner for payment of compensation are prescribed in Part V (Sections 31-34) of the 1894 Act. The Collector, with regard to the payment of compensation, can only act in the manner so provided. It is settled proposition of law (classic statement of Lord Roche in Nazir Ahmad[1]) that where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. Other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden. 19. Now, this is admitted position that award was made on31.01.2008. Notices were issued to the landowners to receive the compensation and since they did not receive the compensation, the amount (Rs.27 crores) was deposited in the government treasury. Can it be said that deposit of the amount of compensation in the government treasury is equivalent to the amount of compensation paid to the landowners/persons interested? We do not think so. In a comparatively recent decision, this Court in Agnelo Santimano Fernandes[2], relying upon the earlier decision in Prem Nath Kapur[3], has held that the deposit of the amount of the compensation in the state's revenue account is of no avail and the liability of the state to pay interest subsists till the amount has not been deposited in court. 20. From the above, it is clear that the award pertaining to the subject land has been made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act. It is also admitted position that compensation so awarded has neither been paid to the landowners/persons interested nor deposited in the court. The deposit of compensation amount in the government treasury is of no avail and cannot be held to be equivalent to compensation paid to the landowners/persons interested. We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that the subject land acquisition proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed under Section24(2) of the 2013 Act. 21. The argument on behalf of the Corporation that the subject land acquisition proceedings have been concluded in all respects under the 1894Act and that they are not affected at all in view of Section 114(2) of the2013 Act, has no merit at all, and is noted to be rejected. Section 114(1) of the 2013 Act repeals 1894 Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 114, however, makes Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 applicable with regard to the effect of repeal but this is subject to the provisions in the 2013 Act. Under Section 24(2) land acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894Act, by legal fiction, are deemed to have lapsed where award has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of 2013 Act and possession of the land is not taken or compensation has not been paid. The legal fiction under Section 24(2) comes into operation as soon as conditions stated therein are satisfied. The applicability of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act being subject to Section 24(2), there is no merit in the contention of the Corporation. 22. In view of the foregoing discussion, it is not necessary to consider the correctness of the impugned judgment on merits. 23. The appeals fail and are dismissed with no order as to costs.

.....................J. (R.M. Lodha)

.....................J. (Madan B. Lokur)

..................../J. (Kurian Joseph)

New Delhi,

January 24, 2014.