The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act) introduced stronger safeguards for landowners. One of the most important protections comes under Section 24, which deals with the lapse of acquisition proceedings. This provision ensures that land cannot remain under endless acquisition without either payment or possession. It allows land to be returned to the original owner in specific circumstances, especially when authorities have failed to act within time.
Section 24 of the 2013 Act
Section 24 addresses how land acquisition cases initiated under the 1894 Land Acquisition Act are to be treated under the new law. It provides clarity for pending cases and gives landowners a chance to reclaim their property if authorities did not fulfill their legal duties.
If an award was not made before 1 January 2014, then the new Act applies to determine compensation. This means landowners are entitled to fairer and higher compensation under the modern framework. However, if an award was made five years or more before the new law came into force but the authorities neither took possession of the land nor paid compensation, then the acquisition lapses. In such cases, the land must be returned to the original owners.
The Role of the Supreme Court in Interpretation
The interpretation of Section 24 led to legal disputes. The phrase used in the law stated that lapse occurs if “possession has not been taken or compensation has not been paid.” The Supreme Court clarified that this must be read as “and.” Therefore, both conditions must exist simultaneously for the acquisition to lapse.
If the government has taken possession but not paid compensation, the proceedings do not lapse. Similarly, if compensation is paid but possession is not taken, the acquisition remains valid. Only when both actions are missing, no compensation and no possession, the land reverts to the original owner.
The Court also held that any period when court orders prevented acquisition proceedings should not count in the five-year period. This prevents misuse of delays caused by litigation.
What Happens When Acquisition Lapses?
When proceedings lapse under Section 24(2), the effect is significant. The acquisition is treated as void. The land automatically returns to the original owner. If the government still wishes to acquire it, they must begin fresh proceedings under the 2013 Act, which includes fairer compensation, consent requirements, and social impact assessments.
This provision acts as a safeguard against indefinite uncertainty for landowners. It prevents situations where families lose control over their land for decades without payment or proper acquisition. By restoring ownership, the law strengthens the principle that private property cannot be taken away without justice and fairness.
Return of Unutilized Land
Apart from Section 24, the 2013 Act also includes Section 101, which deals with land that has been acquired but remains unused. If land is not utilized for the purpose it was acquired within five years from the date of possession, it must be returned.
The return can be made to the original owner, to their legal heirs, or to the government’s Land Bank. This ensures that land is not kept idle after displacing families. It promotes accountability by compelling authorities to use acquired land for genuine public purposes.
The inclusion of Section 101 is crucial because in many cases, land was acquired under the old law but left unused, depriving families of their livelihood without any benefit to society. The new provision strikes a balance by requiring return of such land.
Legal and Social Impact
The combination of Sections 24 and 101 reflects the policy intent of the 2013 Act. The law was framed to address long-standing criticisms of the 1894 Act, which was seen as unfair and exploitative. By creating strict rules for lapse and return of unutilized land, the Act protects landowners from arbitrary state action.
These provisions also encourage transparency. Authorities must act within time, provide compensation promptly, and take possession lawfully. Failure to do so results in the collapse of acquisition. This ensures that the balance of power tilts in favor of the affected families rather than the acquiring body.
Additionally, the possibility of return of land motivates governments and private entities to carefully plan acquisitions. It reduces speculative acquisitions where land was taken but never put to use. In turn, this protects rural communities from unnecessary displacement.
For any specific query call at +91 – 8569843472
Conclusion
Section 24 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 empowers landowners by allowing return of land when compensation and possession are both absent for five years or more before the new law came into force. It prevents indefinite control of land without justice. Along with Section 101, which mandates return of unutilized land, the Act strengthens the rights of landowners and promotes accountability. These provisions underline the principle that acquisition must always serve a genuine public purpose and cannot deprive people of their land without fair and timely compensation.
