High Court of Punjab and Haryana: The order being disposed of by Rajesh Bindal, J., with respect to the writ petition filed challenging the notifications, under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 issued for acquisition of land in the area of Villages Kankrola, Badshahpur, Mohammadpur Jharsa, Harsaru, Sihi, Bas Kushla, Tikri, Islampur and Choma, Tahsil and District Gurgaon, for setting up of metro rail track and other allied uses.
The Court based its decision on the contentions filed by the petitioners that the acquisition has lapsed as the notification had been issued prior to the enactment of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (the New ‘Act of 2013’), and the initiation to be governed under the ‘Old Act, of 1894’, such notification needs to be issued under Section 6 of the Old Act, before 1-1-2014, but in this case it was filed on 18-12-2014.
Hence, the Court held that if any notification has been issued under Section 4 of the Old Act before 1-1-2014, the New Act would remain to be operative in terms of Sections 6 and 24 of the General Clauses Act,1897, only if the proceedings under the Old Act have been initiated before the said date i.e. 1-1-2014, otherwise the said proceedings would lapse by virtue of Section 24(1) of the New Act. Also, further relying on the decision in Deepak Aggarwal v. State of Haryana, (C.W.P. No. 4371 of 2015), where it was opined that “ where notification had been issued prior to 1-1-2014 under Section 6 of the ‘1894 Act’, only for those cases further proceedings can be carried on in accordance with ‘2013 Act’ ”.
The Court further held that the notification under Section 4 of ‘1894 Act’, has lapsed because the declaration under Section 6 of the ‘Old Act’ has not been issued before repeal of ‘1894 Act’ and enactment of the ‘2013 Act’ i.e. before 1-1-2014. [Rama @ Ram Singh v. State of Haryana, C.W.P. No. 22612 of 2015, decided on 5-9-2017]