National Highways land acquisition: Section 24 of the 2013 Act does not apply, and concluded compensation cannot be reopened.

Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 was held inapplicable to acquisitions under the National Highways Act, 1956 because Section 105(3), as amended, extends only compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement, and infrastructure amenities provisions, not Section 24. The compensation claim under the First Schedule of the 2013 Act also failed because the final awards under Section 3G had been passed before 31.12.2014, the full amount had been deposited with the Competent Authority, and the landholders had received the awarded compensation. In the absence of reliable material showing non-payment to the majority of landholders before the cut-off date, the acquisition was treated as concluded and not reopenable.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 applies to acquisitions made under the National Highways Act, 1956; (ii) Whether the land acquisition compensation was liable to be determined under the First Schedule of the 2013 Act on the ground that compensation had not been paid to the majority of landholders before 31.12.2014.

Issue (i): Whether Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 applies to acquisitions made under the National Highways Act, 1956.

Analysis: The land acquisition statute of 2013 excluded the enactments specified in its Fourth Schedule from automatic application, while Section 105(3), as amended, extended only the provisions relating to compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement, and infrastructure amenities to acquisitions under the National Highways Act, 1956. The Court noted that this limited extension did not bring Section 24 into play for acquisitions under the National Highways Act, 1956.

Conclusion: Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 does not apply to acquisitions under the National Highways Act, 1956.

Issue (ii): Whether the land acquisition compensation was liable to be determined under the First Schedule of the 2013 Act on the ground that compensation had not been paid to the majority of landholders before 31.12.2014.

Analysis: The final awards under Section 3G of the National Highways Act, 1956 had been passed before 31.12.2014 and the acquiring authorities had deposited the entire compensation amount with the Competent Authority before that date. The record also showed that the petitioners had received the compensation awarded. The Court relied on the applicable governmental guidelines, which treated cases as closed where the award was announced, the amount deposited, and compensation paid to the majority of landowners on or before 31.12.2014. Since no reliable material showed non-payment to the majority of landholders before the cut-off date, the claim for re-determination under the First Schedule was not made out.

Conclusion: The compensation was not liable to be re-determined under the First Schedule of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions failed on both the statutory applicability question and the compensation re-determination claim, and the acquisition proceedings were treated as concluded and not open to reopening.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the special land acquisition regime applies only to compensation-related schedules by virtue of Section 105(3), Section 24 of the 2013 Act is excluded for National Highways acquisitions, and concluded acquisitions with full deposit and payment before the statutory cut-off are not liable to be reopened for fresh compensation determination.

---