Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. vs. Manjeet Singh Anand & Anr.
Background
The Delhi Government acquired a piece of land in 1964 under the old Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The award was made in 1967, physical possession was taken in June 1967 by drawing a panchnama, and the compensation was deposited with the Reference Court in November 1967. Decades later, after the 2013 Act came into force, Manjeet Singh Anand, who was not the recorded owner but claimed rights through a General Power of Attorney and receipts, filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court asking it to declare that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. The High Court agreed with him, relying on an earlier High Court ruling that itself rested on the Supreme Court's decision in Pune Municipal Corporation vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki (2014).
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court allowed the Government's appeal and set aside the High Court's order. It pointed out that Pune Municipal Corporation had been expressly overruled by a five-judge Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal (2020), which held that an acquisition lapses under Section 24(2) only when the authorities have neither taken possession nor paid compensation for five years or more before 1 January 2014. If either possession was taken or compensation was paid, there is no lapse. Here, possession had been taken in 1967 by panchnama, which the Constitution Bench recognises as a valid mode of taking possession, so there could be no lapse. The Court also held that the High Court should never have entertained the petition at all, because under Shiv Kumar vs. Union of India (2019) and later cases, a subsequent purchaser or a person holding only a power of attorney has no legal standing to challenge an acquisition or claim that it has lapsed.
Lesson Learnt
An old land acquisition does not automatically "lapse" just because compensation was not paid to the owner. If the government actually took possession (or paid compensation), the acquisition stands under the 2013 Act. Also, someone who bought land or holds a power of attorney after the acquisition process began cannot go to court to claim the acquisition has lapsed; that right belongs only to the original recorded owner.