[SC LIVE UPDATES] Land Acquisition- Constitution Bench Hearing- [Court -3]

Law needs to be uniformly applied. How can you say that we can only kick out certain people ?

J. Shah - What if a big chunk of land for which full compensation has been paid, but they’re unable to take the full possession because the project is big ? What will happen then ?

J. Mishra - Even in Narmada case, the entire possession has not been taken. Seasonal cultivation is also there.

J. Shah - Strictly considering actual physical possession can also lead to issues.

This is a penal provision. Lapsing is a harsh action.

What is most worrying is grant of stay and not taking possession.

After how many years can you question this ?

SD - Language of the statute is physical possession.

J. Mishra - What is the purport of this ?

J. Mishra - Due process has not been followed for taking possession. Whether it’s open to question the same. What is the answer ? Houses have come up; they say possession is not taken.

J. Mishra - New arguments or new gamut of facts were not taken into consideration. Some judgements were passed and they were broadly followed.

SD - Yes, that’s the case.

When will the proceedings lapse ?

1. Award under S11 of 1894 Act not made five years post commencement of new Act.

2. Physical possession not taken or compensation not paid.

J. Banerjee - Why was this period of 5 years taken into account ? It’s difficult to accept the legislative intent.

J. Bhat - This is not a new idea that was introduced.

SD - Here, Parliament is saying that we don’t want to go with a case by case basis. We want a simpler method. They didn’t want individual adjudication.

SD - I would like you to consider the prejudice in this factual context. The Parliament is saying that the previous regime was very prejudicial to the citizens. Right injunction or wrong injunction; we move forward with the new Act. Simple, easy and clear.

J. Banerjee - Court relies on the Explanation that was inserted in the S6 of the old Act. While doing so, abundant caution had been exercised. The meaning that already existed. Possession could not be taken, payment could not be made. The legislative intent could not be meant to prejudice any party.