Land Once Acquired By State Cannot Be Divested, Reconveyed To Original Owner: HP HC Orders NHAI To Pay Compensation For Land Acquisition

The single bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua was hearing a petition, in which the petitioner submitted that their lands were acquired by the respondents under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956. They submitted that after passing all the necessary notifications which are statutorily required under Section 3 of the Act, award was passed in their favour for the acquisition of the land. However, despite the completion of the process, the respondents did not release the compensation amount which was due and admissible to them. Hence, they prayed for directing seeking compensation in terms of the award passed by the respondents for acquisition of their lands.

The respondent authorities, on the other hand, submitted that the petitioners' lands were surplus and therefore, the land may be utilized by the landowners, divesting NHAI from such land or any rights in it.

The High Court, however, rejected the contentions of the respondents and held that land once acquired by the State could not be divested, since no legal provisions existed to the effect.

The Court ordered the respondents to release the compensation amount to the petitioners in terms of the award within a period of four weeks from the order. Passing the order, the Court said that:

"Petitioners' lands have been acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956 read with provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013. Petitioners' lands in question, thus, vested in the respondents on 11.12.2020. Notwithstanding this vestment under Section 3D of the National Highways Act even the award under the provisions of Section 3(G) & (H) of the Act was passed on 15.03.2021. The award presupposes taking over of possession of lands in question by the respondents in terms of Section 3(E) of the Act. Viewing from any angle, there is no escape from the conclusion that lands of petitioners stood completely vested in the respondents. There is no provision which permits divesting of land as is requested by the respondents in their reply."

Relying on the decisions of the Supreme Court in Indore Development Authority v. Manohar Lal and Others, (2020) 8 SCC 129 and V. Chandershekaran and Another v. Administrative Officer and Others, (2012) 12 SCC 133, the High Court added that:

"Once the land is acquired and it vests in the State, free from all encumbrances, it is not the concern of the land owner, whether the land is being used for the purpose for which it was acquired or for any other purpose. He becomes persona non-grata once the land vests in the State. He has a right to only receive compensation for the same, unless the acquisition proceeding is itself challenged. The State neither has the requisite power to reconvey the land to the person interested, nor can such person claim any right of restitution on any ground, whatsoever, unless there is some statutory amendment to this effect."

Accordingly, the Court allowed the petition and directed the authorities to release the compensation amount to the petitioners in terms of the award within a period of four weeks from the date of passing of the order.

Case Title: Sukh Dev and Others v. Union of India and Others

Citation: CWP No.6660 of 2021

Coram: Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (HP) 40

Click Here To Read/Download the Order