Actual possession required for vesting under land acquisition law; an award alone does not transfer title to the State.

Vesting under Section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 arises only after actual taking of possession following the award; an award by itself does not create absolute vesting in the State or displace the landowner. Where there is no proof of possession being taken by proper panchnama or any other acceptable mode, continued possession with the landowners is inconsistent with vesting, and precedents based on actual possession taken do not apply. On those facts, the finding of vesting was held unsustainable, the impugned order was set aside, and the writ petition was remitted to the High Court for decision on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 can be treated as vested in the State Government under Section 16 merely because an award has been made, when actual and physical possession has not been taken.

Analysis: Vesting under Section 16 follows only upon taking possession after the award under Section 11. The legal presumption of absolute vesting cannot arise unless possession is actually taken by the acquiring authority. In the absence of proof of taking possession by a proper panchnama or other acceptable mode, continued possession with the landowners is inconsistent with vesting. The precedents relied upon by the High Court applied where possession had in fact been taken, and therefore did not govern the present facts.

Conclusion: The finding that the land had vested in the State Government was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the writ petition was remitted to the High Court for decision on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Vesting under Section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 occurs only after actual taking of possession, and an award by itself does not divest the landowner or create a presumption of vesting.

---