Section 11A stay exclusion runs until the acquisition authority is informed of vacation, keeping the award within time.

For purposes of Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the period during which acquisition proceedings are stayed by a court order is excluded until the authority concerned is actually informed of the vacation of that stay. Here, although the stay was vacated on 23 July 2002, the Land Acquisition Collector received the certified vacation order only on 27 March 2003 and had remained under a bona fide impression that the restraint continued. On that basis, the award was treated as within time, the acquisition did not lapse, and the challenge to the proceedings failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the ground that the award was made beyond two years from the publication of the declaration under Section 6, and whether the period during which the stay order operated had to be excluded only upto the date of its vacation or upto the date when the vacation order was communicated to the Land Acquisition Collector.

Analysis: Section 11A requires the award to be made within two years from the publication of the declaration under Section 6, but its Explanation excludes the period during which proceedings are stayed by a court order. The stay in the connected writ proceedings was vacated on 23 July 2002, but the Land Acquisition Collector received a certified copy of that order only on 27 March 2003. The record showed that the Collector had not been informed earlier, had remained under the bona fide impression that the stay continued, and was not expected to proceed on the basis of an unauthenticated understanding of vacation of the restraint. The Court also noted the appellants' conduct in repeatedly litigating to delay the acquisition and the fact that possession had already been taken and the land was being used for the public project.

Conclusion: The period had to be excluded until communication of the vacation order to the Collector, so the award was not barred by Section 11A and the acquisition proceedings did not lapse. The challenge failed.

Ratio Decidendi: For purposes of Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the exclusion of time during which proceedings are stayed by a court order continues until the authority concerned is actually informed of the vacation of that stay.

---