© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea for restoring a piece of land to its original owners despite its non-utilisation by the government, which acquired it almost 20 years ago, and ruled once the compensation has been paid and the possession handed over, petitioners couldn’t reclaim it.
A bench of Justices Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Anish Dayal referred to the precedent of the Supreme Court and said even if a land was acquired for a public purpose and not utilised for the said purpose, the government had the option to divest the use of land for any other public purpose or put the land in the “land bank”.
“In such an eventuality and having regard to the aforesaid position of law, once petitioners have received the compensation and handed over the possession of the land, they cannot assert statutory right to re-claim possession of the land,” it added.
The land in question was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
The court emphasised that an un-utilised land could be returned but it was under the discretion of the government and pointed out, “The exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction in favour of petitioners for directing the release of land in their favour cannot be granted.”
The petitioners said they were entitled to the restoration as the government did not conduct any development activity on it for over 20 years and offered to return the compensation amount for getting back the possession.
They relied on Section 101 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013, to buttress their claims.
The provision of the section says, “When any land acquired under this Act remains unutilised for a period of five years from the date of taking over the possession, the same shall be returned to the original owner or owners or their legal heirs, as the case may be, or to the Land Bank of the appropriate Government by reversion in the manner as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government”.
“Even if we consider the provisions of Section 101 of the Act of 2013, the fact remains that the un-utilised land can be returned, that too under discretion of the Government; however, the Government can put such land in the Land Bank to be used for the Governmental/public purpose (sic),” the bench said.
The respondents, including the Union of India, opposed the claim and asserted that even if the land was acquired under the 1894 Act, there was no provision to release the land in favour of petitioners.
