THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.31583 of 2014 Dated : 25.11.2014 Between:
Rayapati Srinivasa Rao S/o.Late Satyanarayana, Aged about 40 yrs, Dorasanipadu Village, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal, West Godavari District & another .. Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretaru (Land Acquisition), Secretariat, Hyderabad & 2 others .. Respondents This Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.31583 of 2014 ORDER :
A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the ‘Act’) was issued on 01.03.2008 proposing to acquire huge extent of land for the purpose of laying canal to carry water to fill the village tanks. The notification include the lands of the petitioners to an extent of Ac.1-43 cents in Survey No.42/2, Ac.1-79 Cents in Survey No.16/3B of Dorasanipadu Village and Ac.1-57 cents in Survey No.149/3B and 149/3C of Ch.Pothepally Village. Urgency clause was invoked and enquiry under Section 5(A) of the Act was dispensed with. Award was passed on 25.05.2006 followed by a supplementary award on 19.02.2008 in so far as lands in Dorasanipadu village and award was passed on 25.05.2006 followed by supplementary award on 17.05.2007 in so far as lands in Ch.Pothepalli village is concerned.
2. The petitioners filed W.P.No.22424 of 2008 seeking declaration against passing of an award against petitioners and issuing of notice under Section 12(2) of the Act. When the said writ petition was taken up for consideration, on instructions learned Government Pleader reported that no award was passed in so far as petitioners are concerned and issuance of notice under Section 12(2) of the Act, was a mistake and subsequently the notice was withdrawn and the petitioners were accordingly informed. This Court held that dispensing with enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act by invoking urgency clause was erroneous and accordingly set aside the notification issued under Section 6 of the Act and further directed to conduct enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, in so far as the lands of the petitioners are concerned.
3. Consequent to disposal of the above writ petition, enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, was conducted and on 19.06.2010 orders were passed rejecting the objections filed by the petitioners. On 26.06.2010, declaration under Section 6 of the Act, was issued. Aggrieved by the said orders, W.P.No.15449 of 2010 was filed. On 02.07.2010, this Court passed interim orders not to dispossess the petitioners from their properties. By order dated 13.03.2012 the interim order granted on 02.07.2010 was vacated giving liberty to the respondents to proceed further with reference to acquisition of land of the petitioners. Even after vacation of the interim order, no award was passed.
4. In the counter affidavit of the above writ petition in Para No.6, the respondents have categorically admitted that no award was passed and issuance of notice under Section 12 (2) of the Act, was by mistake and infact the same was withdrawn on 10.09.2008 and parties were informed accordingly. On 24.11.2014, W.P.No.15449 of 2010 is withdrawn.
5. This writ petition is instituted challenging Section 4(1) notification dated 01.03.2008 and declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act dated 26.06.2010, as the said proceedings lapsed due to non-compliance of provisions of Section 7-A of the Act.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in accordance with provisions of the Act, an award has to be passed within two years from the date of declaration under Section 6 of the Act. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 26.06.2010 and therefore, award ought to have been passed within two years thereafter, after excluding the period of stay granted by this Court i.e., from 02.07.2010 to 13.03.2012. Even after excluding the above period, the two years period available to the respondent to pass award would expire by middle of January, 2014. Therefore, after January, 2014, respondents are precluded from passing award. Even now, no award is passed and therefore, contends that the land acquisition proceedings, lapse.
7. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, there is no discussion of the steps taken by the respondents after vacation of the interim order dated 13.03.2012. The counter is also silent as to passing of an award. The counter affidavit is deposed on 10.11.2014. As per the averments in the counter affidavit, it is apparent that by 10.11.2014 no award is passed.
8. Section 11-A of the Act reads as under :
(1) The Collector shall make an award under Section 11 within a period of two years from the date of the publication of the declaration and if no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition of the land shall lapse.
Provided that in a case where the said declaration has been published before the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (68 of 1984), the award shall be made within a period of two years from such commencement.
Explanation: In computing the period of two years referred to in this section, the period during which any action or proceeding to be taken in pursuance of the said declaration is stayed by an order of a Court shall be excluded.
9. The principle of law on the above subject is no more res integra. In several decisions, it is held that no award can be passed after lapse of two years from the date of declaration under Section 6 of the Act and entire proceedings for acquisition of the land shall lapse on this ground alone. The explanation to Section 11-A of the Act saves the time during which stay granted by Court operates. The recent decision in the long line of precedents
[1]
is in “Singareni Collaries Co., Ltd., Vs Venuganti Ramakrishna Rao” .
In the instant case no award is passed within two years from the date of Section 6 declaration, even after excluding the period of stay granted by this Court in W.P.No.15449 of 2010.
10. Having regard to the mandate of Section 11-A of the Act, the land acquisition proceedings initiated on 01.03.2008 and declaration under Section 6 of the Act issued on 26.06.2010 are deemed to have lapsed, since no award is passed and period of two years from the date of declaration under Section 6 of the Act lapsed, even after excluding the period of operation of the interim order of this Court i.e., from 02.07.2010 to 13.03.2012.
11. Writ petition is allowed accordingly. However, it is made clear that if the respondents intend to acquire the land, they should initiate proceedings for acquisition afresh. There shall be no order as to costs.
12. Miscellaneous petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand closed.
P.NAVEEN RAO,J 25th November, 2014
Rds
[1] (2013) 8 SCC 789